mm 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT   LOS  ANGELES 


THE  GIFT  OF 

MAY  TREAT  MORRISON 

IN  MEMORY  OF 

ALEXANDER  F  MORRISON 


SPEECHES 


SECOND   AND   THIRD    SESSIONS 


THIRTY-SEVENTH   CONGRESS, 


AND  IN  THE  VACATION. 


BY    BENJ.    F.    THOMAS. 

H 


BOSTON: 

PRINTED   BY   JOHN  WILSON   AND   SON. 
1863. 


U. 

O 

t 

a 


£452 


C0  mg  §rotjxer, 
g  WILLIAM     THOMAS,     ESQ., 

CM 

§ 

tEfjig  Ufllutne  is  EnscrtbelJ, 

k 

AS  A  TOKEN  OF  ESTEEM,  LOVE,  AND  GRATITUDE. 


434363 


"  /  set  out  with  a  perfect  distrust  of  my  own  abilities ; 
a  total  renunciation  of  every  speculation  of  my  own;  and 
with  a  profound  reverence  for  the  wisdom  of  our  ances- 
tors, who  have  left  us  the  inheritance  of  so  happy  a  con- 
stitution, and  so  flourishing  an  empire,  and,  what  is  a 
thousand  times  more  valuable,  the  treasury  of  the  maxims 
and  principles  which  formed  the  one,  and  obtained  the 
other.'' 

BURKE  on  Conciliation  with  America. 


N  O  T  E. 


THE  speeches  and  addresses  in  this  volume  cover  a  period 
of  about  fifteen  months,  including  the  second  and -third 
sessions  of  the  Thirty-seventh  Congress  and  the  vacation. 
I  have  put  them  in  this  form  to  meet  the  wishes  of  a 
few  friends,  in  justice  to  myself,  —  that  my  position  may 
not  be  misunderstood  —  and  in  the  hope,  not  very  buoy- 
ant, that  they  may  do  good.  I  am  painfully  sensible 
how  fragmentary  and  defective  they  are.  But  the  prin- 
ciples they  seek  to  illustrate  and  defend  are  just  and 
true,  and  will  weather  the  storm.  They  constitute  the 
traditional  policy  of  the  country,  a  return  to  which  is, 
in  my  judgment,  its  only  security.  That  they  are  un- 
popular at  this  moment,  does  not  disturb  me :  the  more 
imperative  is  the  duty  of  standing  by  and  upholding 
them.  The  citizen  owes  to  the  country,  in  the  hour  of 
her  peril,  honest  counsel,  calmly  given,  but  with  the 
"  love  that  casteth  out  fear."  Never  were  freedom  of 
thought  and  of  the  lips  and  pen  so  necessary  as  now. 
They  have  become,  not  only  the  most  precious  of  rights, 
but  the  most  religious  of  duties. 


NOTE. 


In  preparing  for  the  printer,  I  have  corrected  a  few 
of  the  errors  of  style.  I  have  not  felt  at  liberty  to  make 
material  changes  in  the  thought.  In  one  or  two  in- 
stances (as  in  the  remarks  on  the  Conscription  Bill), 
I  have  added,  from  notes,  suggestions  omitted  at  the 
time  of  delivery.  The  recurrence  of  the  same  idea,  and 
of  even  the  same  expression,  in  different  speeches  on 
the  same  or  kindred  topics,  could  not  well  be  avoided. 

From  the  remarks  on  the  Trent  case,  I  have  stricken 
two  or  three  sentences  which  were  thought  to  breathe  a 
spirit  of  vengeance  ;  a  spirit  the  gospel  does  not  permit 
us  to  indulge,  even  against  the  enemies  of  our  country. 
Of  the  expressions  of  confidence  in  the  conservative 
views  of  the  President,  I  can  only  say,  I  believed  them 
well  grounded  when  they  were  made. 


JAMAICA  PLAIN,  May  25, 1863. 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

THE  RELATION 'OF  THE  "SECEDED  STATES"-  (so  CALLED)  TO 
THE    UNION,   AND    THE    CONFISCATION    OF   PROPERTY,   AND 

EMANCIPATION  OF  SLAVES,  IN  SUCH  STATES 1 

CONFISCATION < 38 

THE  TREASURY-NOTE  BILL    .     .  Ji '! 'i'~  .    '.     .     .     .     ...     66 

RECOGNITION  OF  LIBERIA  AND  HAYTI 79 

DEATH  OF  HON.  GOLDSMITH  F.  BAILEY 86 

CASE  OF  THE  "TRENT" 91 

SPEECH  AT  THE  MASS  MEETING  FOR  RECRUITING,  ON  BOSTON 

COMMON 100 

THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE 104 

SPEECH  AT  CHELSEA 128 

REMARKS  ON  THE  BORDER  STATES 141 

ON   THE    BILL    "TO   RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS    FOR   THE 

SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT" 145 

THE  LOUISIANA  ELECTION  CASES 164 

THE  CONSCRIPTION  BILL  .     .          184 

NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION   .  193 


SPEECHES. 


THE  RELATION  OF  THE  "SECEDED  STATES"  (SO  CALLED)  TO  THE 
UNION,  AND  THE  CONFISCATION  OF  PROPERTY,  AND  EMANCIPA- 
TION OF  SLAVES,  IN  SUCH  STATES,  APRIL  10,  1862. 

The  House  being  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  on  the  State  of 
the  Union,  Mr.  THOMAS  said, — 

.0 

Mr.  CHAIRMAN,  —  I  avail  myself  of  the  indulgence  of 
the  Committee  to  make  some  suggestions  upon  subjects 
now  attracting  the  attention  of  Congress  and  of  the 
country,  —  the  relations  of  the  "seceded  States"  (so 
called)  to  the  Union,  the  confiscation  of  property,  and 
the  emancipation  of  slaves,  in  such  States.  Sensible 
how  deeply  the  interests  of  the  country  are  involved  in 
their  right  decision,  I  can  only  say,  I  have  given  to 
them  careful  and  patient  consideration,  with  an  earnest 
hope  and  desire  to  learn  what  my  duty  is,  and  faithfully 
and  firmly  to  discharge  it. 

The  questions  are  novel  as  they  are  momentous. 
In  the  discussion  of  them,  little  aid  can  be  derived  from 
our  own  precedents,  from  the  history  of  other  nations, 
or  from  writers  on  constitutional  and  international  law. 
The  solution  of  the  difficult  problems  of  right  and  duty 


2  RELATION    OF   THE    STATES 

involved  must  be  found  in  the  careful  study  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  the:  CtinsfcitutioJi,:  aa'd  the  just  and  logical  ap- 
plication af tth-ecV;  t&.'tiiis  pey. condition  of  things. 

The  peculiar  feature  of  our  civil  polity  is,  that  we 
live  under  written  constitutions,  defining  and  limiting 
the  powers  of  Government,  and  securing  the  rights  of  the 
individual  subject.  Our  political  theory  is,  that  the  peo- 
ple retain  the  sovereignty,  and  that  the  Government 
has  such  powers  only  as  the  people,  by  the  organic  law, 
have  conferred  upon  it.  Doubless  these  inflexible 
rules  sometimes  operate  as  a  restraint  upon  measures, 
which,  for  the  time  being,  seem  to  be  desirable.  The 
compensation  is,  that  our  experience  has  shown,  that, 
as  a  general  rule  and  in  the  long-run,  the  restraint  is 
necessary  and  wholesome. 

It  is,  I  readily  admit,  by  no  narrow  and  rigid  con- 
struction of  the  words  of  the  Constitution  that  the 
powers  and  duties  of  Congress  on  these  subjects  are  to 
be  ascertained.  Every  provision  must  be  fairly  con- 
strued in  view  of  the  great  objects  the  Constitution  was 
ordained  to  effect,  and  with  the  full  recognition  of  the 
powers  resulting  from  clear  implication  as  well  as  ex- 
press grant.  Designed  as  the  bond  of  perpetual  union 
and  as  the  framework  of  permanent  government,  we 
should  be  very  slow  to  conclude  that  it  lacked  any  of 
the  necessary  powers  for  self-defence  and  self-preserva- 
tion. 

But  recognizing  the  profound  wisdom  and  foresight 
of  the  Constitution,  and  its  adaptation  to  all  the  exi- 
gencies of  war  and  peace,  when  a  measure  is  proposed 
in  apparent  conflict  with  its  provisions,  we  may  well 


TO    THE    UNION.  6 

pause  to  inquire,  whether,  after  all,  the  measure  is  ne- 
cessary ;  and  whether  we  may  not  bend  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, rather  than  that  the  Constitution  should  give  way 
to  us.  When  we  make  necessity  our  lawgiver,  we  are 
very  ready  to  believe  the  necessity  exists. 

Nor  are  we  to  forget  that  the  Constitution  is  a  bill  of 
rights  as  well  as  a  frame  of  government;  that  among 
the  most  precious  portions  of  the  instrument  are  the 
first  ten  amendments;  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
people  of  the  United  States  could  have  been  induced  to 
adopt  the  Constitution,  except  upon  the  assurance  of 
the  adoption  of  these  amendments,  which  are  our  Magna 
Carta,  embodying  in  the  organic  law  the  securities  of 
life,  liberty,  and  estate,  which,  to  the  Anglo-Saxon 
mind,  are  the  seed  and  the  fruit  of  free  government. 
Some  portions  of  our  history  have  led  to  the  conclusion, 
that  the  existence  of  these  amendments  may,  in  the 
confusion  of  the  times,  have  been  overlooked. 

In  my  humble  judgment,  Mr.  Chairman,  there  has 
been,  and  is  now,  but  one  issue  before  the  country;  and 
that  is,  whether  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land.  That  Constitu- 
tion was  formed  by  the  people  of  the  United  States.  It 
acts,  not  upon  the  States,  nor,  through  the  States,  upon 
us  as  citizens  of  the  several  States,  but  directly  upon  us 
as  citizens  of  the  United  States ;  claiming,  on  the  one 
hand,  our  allegiance,  and  giving  to  us,  on  the  other,  its 
protection.  It  is  not  a  compact  between  the  States,  or 
the  peoples  of  the  several  States :  it  is  itself  a  frame 
of  government  ordained  and  established  by  the  people  of 
the  United  States. 


4  RELATION    OF    THE    STATES 

The  sphere  of  the  Government  so  established  is  indeed 
limited ;  but  within  that  sphere  its  power  is  supreme. 
It  is  a  Government  of  delegated  powers ;  and  the  powers 
not  delegated  are  reserved  either  to  the  States  or  to  the 
people  (Amendments,  art.  10). 

The  powers  and  functions  granted  to  the  National 
Government  by  the  Constitution  are  embraced  in  three 
general  classes,  —  those  concerning  the  relations  of  the 
United  States  to  foreign  nations ;  those  concerning  the 
relations  between  the  States  and  their  citizens  respec- 
tively ;  and  certain  powers,  which,  though  belonging  to 
the  home-department  of  Government,  to  be  useful  and 
effective,  must  be  general  and  uniform  in  their  opera- 
tion throughout  the  country.  A  very  large  proportion 
of  the  ordinary  and  necessary  powers  and  functions  of 
Government  is  left  in  the  States.  The  powers  of  the 
National  Government  do  not  extend  to  or  include  the 
domestic  institutions  or  internal  police  of  the  States. 
The  separation  and  distinction  between  the  respective 
spheres  of  the  State  and  National  Governments  is  an 
essential  characteristic  of  our  system,  and  is  as  old  as 
the  idea  of  Union  itself.  No  Union  was  suggested, 
no  project  of  one  for  a  moment  entertained,  on  any 
other  basis.  The  Colonies,  in  authorizing  their  dele- 
gates to  assent  to  a  separation  from  Great  Britain,  and 
to  form  a  Union  'for  the  general  defence,  expressly 
restricted  them  from  consenting  to  any  articles  of  union 
which  should  take  from  the  Colonies  the  power  over 
their  internal  police  and  domestic  institutions.  The 
resolutions  of  the  Colonies  of  New  Jersey,  Maryland, 
and  Rhode  Island,  may  be  cited  in  illustration. 


TO    THE    UNION.  5 

The  resolution  of  the  Provincial  Congress  of  New 
Jersey  —  passed  June  21,  1776,  and  laid  before  the 
Continental  Congress  on  the  28th  of  June  —  empowered 
the  delegates  of  that  Province  to  — 

"  Unite  with  the  delegates  of  the  other  Colonies  in  declaring  the 
United  Colonies  independent  of  Great  Britain  ;  entering  into  a  con- 
federation for  union  and  common  defence ;  making  treaties  with  foreign 
nations  for  commerce  and  assistance ;  and  to  take  such  other  mea- 
sures as  may  appear  to  them  and  you  necessary  for  these  great 
ends  ;  promising  to  support  them  with  the  whole  force  of  this  Pro- 
vince ;  always  observing,  whatever  plan  of  confederacy  you  enter 
into,  the  regulating  the  internal  police  of  this  Province  is  to  be  reserved 
to  the  Colony  Legislature." 

The  Convention  of  the  Colony  of  Maryland,  by  a 
resolution  (adopted  June  28,  1776,  and  laid  before  Con- 
gress July  1),  authorized  and  empowered  the  deputies 
of  the  Colony  to  — 

"  Concur  with  the  other  United  Colonies,  or  a  majority  of  them, 
in  declaring  the  United  Colonies  free  and  independent,  in  favoring 
such  further  compact  and  confederation  between  them,  in  making 
foreign  alliances,  and  in  adopting  such  other  measures  as  shall  be 
judged  necessary  for  securing  the  liberties  of  America ;  and  that  said 
Colony  will  hold  itself  bound  by  the  resolutions  of  the  majority  of  the 
United  Colonies  in  the  premises  ;  provided  the  sole  and  exclusive  right 
of  regulating  the  internal  government  and  police  of  that  Colony  be  re- 
served to  the  people  thereof."  —  Journals  of  Congress,  1776,  pp.  390, 
391,  392. 

The  credentials  of  the  Assembly  of  Rhode  Island, 
after  giving  to  the  delegates  power  to  enter  into  union 
and  confederation,  add, — 

"  Taking  the  greatest  care  to  secure  to  this  Colony,  in  the  strongest 
and  most  perfect  manner,  its  present  established  form,  and  all  the 
powers  of  government,  so  far  as  relates  to  its  internal  police,  and  con- 
duct of  our  affairs,  civil  and  religious."  —  Ibid.,  p.  343. 


6  RELATION    OF    THE    STATES 

In  the  Revolutionary  Government,  in  the  Articles  of 
Confederation,  in  the  Constitution,  in  its  judicial  inter- 
pretation, in  every  administration  under  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  in  every  department  of  the  Government,  the 
limitation  has  thus  far  been  carefully  recognized  and 
faithfully  kept.  This  familiar,  well-settled  doctrine,  as 
to  the  independent  respective  spheres  of  the  National 
and  State  Government,  has  never,  perhaps,  been  more 
clearly  and  strongly  stated  than  in  one  of  the  resolu- 
tions adopted  by  the  Convention  which  ushered  the 
present  administration  into  power :  — 

"  Resolved,  That  the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the  rights  of  the 
States,  and  especially  the  right  of  each  State  to  order  and  control  its 
own  domestic  institutions  according  to  its  own  judgment  exclusively, 
is  essential  to  that  balance  of  powers  on  which  the  perfection  and 
endurance  of  our  political  fabric  depends." 

It  is  expressed  also,  with  clearness  and  strength,  in 
the  resolution  adopted  by  the  House,  near  the  close 
of  the  last  session  of  Congress,  by  a  nearly  unanimous 
vote :  — 

"  Resolved,  That  neither  the  Federal  Government,  nor  the  people 
or  governments  of  the  non-slaveholding  States,  have  a  purpose  or  a 
constitutional  right  to  legislate  upon  or  interfere  with  slavery  in  any 
of  the  States  of  the  Union." 

These  doctrines,  as  to  the  supremacy  of  the  National 
Government  within  its  sphere  and  of  the  reserved 
rights  of  the  States,  are  elementary.  Between  them 
there  is  no  necessary  conflict.  Each  is  the  complement 
of  the  other,  — both  vital  parts  of  that  political  system 
under  whose  admirable  distribution  and  adjustment  of 
powers  the  people  of  the  United  States  have  had  for 


TO    THE    UNION.  7 

seventy  years  incomparably  the  best  and  most  beneficent 
Government  the  world  has  ever  known,  —  a  Govern- 
ment now  imperilled,  not  by  reason  of  any  inherent 
defect  or  any  want  of  wisdom  or  foresight  in  its  founders, 
not  because  we  have  outgrown  its  provisions,  not  be- 
cause it  is  behind  the  age ;  but  because  it  has  fallen 
upon  an  age  not  worthy  of  It,  —  an  age  which  has  failed 
to  appreciate  the  spirit  of  wisdom,  prudence,  and  mode- 
ration, in  which  it  was  founded. 

Such  being  the  relation  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  to  its  citizens  and  to  the  States,  the  first 
question  that  arises  is,  how  far  this  relation  is  affected 
by  the  fact  that  several  of  the  States  have  assumed,  by 
ordinances  of  secession,  to  separate  themselves  from  the 
Union. 

The  people  of  the  United  States,  in  and  by  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  established  a  National 
Government,  without  limitation  of  time,  "  for  themselves 
and  their  posterity."  It  had  been  provided  under  the 
Articles  of  Confederation,  that  the  Union  should  be 
perpetual.  The  Constitution  was  established  to  form 
"a  more  perfect  union"  than  that  of  the  Confederation ; 
more  efficient  in  power,  and  not  less  durable  in  time. 
There  is  not  a  clause  or  word  in  the  Constitution,  which 
looks  to  separation.  It  has  careful  provisions  for  its 
amendment,  none  for  its  destruction ;  capacity  for  ex- 
pansion, none  for  contraction ;  a  door  for  new  States  to 
come  in,  none  for  old  or  new  ones  to  go  out.  An  ordi- 
nance of  secession  has  no  legal  meaning  or  force ;  is 
wholly  inoperative  and  void.  The  Constitution,  and 
the  laws  and  treaties  made  under  it,  the  people  have 


8  RELATION    OF    THE    STATES 

declared,  "  shall  be  the  supreme  law  of  the  land ;  and 
the  judges  in  every  State  shall  be  bound  thereby,  any 
thing  in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  any  State  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding."  The  act  of  secession,  there- 
fore, cannot  change  in  the  least  degree  the  legal  relation 
of  the  State  to  the  Union.  No  provision  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  no  law  or  treaty  of  the 
United  States,  can  be  abrogated  or  impaired  thereby. 
No  citizen  of  the  United  States,  residing  in  the  seceded 
States,  is,  by  such  ordinance  of  secession,  deprived  of 
the  just  protection  of,  or  exempted  from  any  of  his 
duties  to,  the  United  States.  In  contemplation  of  law, 
the  reciprocal  duties  of  protection  and  allegiance  remain 
unaffected.  After  the  act  of  secession,  the  province 
and  duty  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  are 
the  same,  according  to  the  full  measure  of  its  ability,  as 
before,  —  to  enforce  in  every  part  of  the  Union,  and 
over  every  inch  of  its  territory,  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  the  necessary  result  of  these  principles,  that  no 
State  can  abrogate  or  forfeit  the  rights  of  its  citizens  to 
the  protection  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
or  the  privileges  and  blessings  of  the  Union  which  that 
Constitution  secures  and  makes  perpetual.  The  pri- 
mary, paramount  allegiance  of  every  citizen  of  the 
United  States  is  to  the  nation ;  and  the  State  authorities 
can  no  more  impair  that  allegiance  than  a  county  court 
or  a  village  constable.  Every  proposition,  however  art- 
fully disguised,  which  seeks  to  give  any  effect  or  vitality 
to  an  ordinance  of  secession,  for  evil  or  for  good,  is 
itself  a  confession  of  the  right.  To  say  that  an  act  of 


TO    THE    UNION. 

secession  is  inoperative  and  void  against  the  Constitution, 
and  that  this  void  act,  sustained  by  force,  is  a  practical 
abdication  of  the  rights  of  the  State  under  the  Con- 
stitution, is  to  blow  hot  and  blow  cold,  to  deny  and  affirm, 
in  the  same  breath ;  to  state  a  proposition  which  is  felo 
de  se. 

It  is  also  the  plain  and  necessary  conclusion,  from 
the  principles  before  stated,  that  a  State  cannot  commit 
treason.  Under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
persons  only  can  commit  treason.  How  treason  may  be 
committed,  and  how  tried  and  punished,  the  Constitu- 
tion points  out  (Constitution,  art.  3,  sect.  3 ;  Amend- 
ments, arts.  5  and  6).  The  persons  who  for  the  time 
being  hold  the  offices  under  a  State  Government  may 
individually  commit  treason ;  but  the  acts  of  the  State 
officers,  transcending  their  authority  and  in  conflict  with 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  involve  in  their 
guilt  no  man  who  has  not  himself  levied  war  against  the 
United  States,  or  adhered  to  their  enemies,  giving  them 
aid  and  comfort.  It  is  only  we,  the  subjects,  that  can 
commit  treason,  or  expiate  its  guilt.  No  man,  or  set  of 
men,  can,  without  our  consent,  involve  us  in  the  awful 
crime,  or  subject  us  to  the  awful  penalties,  of  treason. 

As  a  State  cannot  commit  the  crime  of  treason,  it 
cannot  incur  a  forfeiture  of  its  powers  and  functions  as 
the  penalty  of  treason.  The  punishment  provided  for 
traitors  is  the  result  of  judicial  trial,  conviction,  and 
judgment.  How  to  indict  a  State,  the  constitution  of 
the  court,  the  mode  of  trial,  the  form  of  judgment,  and 
process  of  execution,  yet  exist  in  gremio  legis.  Nor  is 
it  material  that  the  acts  of  the  State  officers  have  the 

2 


10  RELATION    OF   THE    STATES 

sanction  and  support  of  the  majority  of  the  people  of 
the  State.  Within  the  proper  sphere  of  the  State 
Government,  the  rule  of  the  majority  will  prevail,  ex- 
cept so  far  as  it  is  restrained  by  the  organic  law ;  but 
the  majority  of  the  voters  of  the  State  cannot  deprive 
the  minority  of  the  rights  secured  to  them  by  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States.  Some  of  these  rights 
may  be  kept  in  abeyance.  Their  exercise  may  be  over- 
borne by  superior  physical  force.  They  may  sleep  ;  but 
it  is  not  the  sleep  of  death.  They  are  integral  parts  of 
the  Constitution,  and  can  only  perish  when  the  Consti- 
tution perishes. 

The  State  of  Tennessee,  for  example,  has  passed  an 
ordinance  of  "  secession."  She  has  allied  herself  with 
the  other  seceding  States.  Her  vote  of  secession  is 
sustained  by  force.  Upon  this  new  and  startling  theory 
of  the  Constitution,  she  has  already  incurred  a  forfeit- 
ure of  all  those  functions  and  powers  essential  to  the 
continued  existence  of  the  State  as  a  body  politic.  The 
voice  of  her  eloquent  senator  is  heard  in  the  Capitol ; 
her  venerable  judge  sits  in  the  highest  judicial  tribunal, 
and  exercises  the  highest  functions  of  Government; 
her  representatives  mingle  in  our  councils ;  her  loyal 
citizens  greet  with  tears  of  joy  the  banner  of  our  ad- 
vancing hosts,  —  their  hope  and  our  hope,  their  pride 
and  our  pride.  Yet,  upon  this  theory,  there  is  no  Ten- 
nessee: "the  Commonwealth  itself  is  past  and  gone." 
Its  citizens,  can  no  longer  be  represented  in  this  House 
or  the  Senate.  The  courts  of  the  United  States  are 
closed  against  them  (Corporation  of  New  Orleans  vs. 
Winter,  1  Wheaton  Rep.,  91).  The  requisition  upon 


TO   THE    UNION. 


11 


the  State  for  troops  was  a  mistake.  The  direct  tax  was 
a  mistake.  Its  citizens,  under  the  shield  of  the  Consti- 
tution, are  outlaws,  and  in  their  own  homes  exiles.  If 
such  be  the  effects  of  a  void  act  of  secession,  we  should 
be  grateful  we  are  not  called  upon  to  witness  the  results 
of  a  valid  one.  There  is  nothing  in  the  doctrines  of 
nullification  or  secession  more  disloyal  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, more  fatal  to  the  Union,  than  this  doctrine  of 
State  suicide.  It  is  the  gospel  of  anarchy,  the  philoso- 
phy of  dissolution.  Nor  by  carrying  out  this  doctrine 
of  the  destruction  or  forfeiture  of  the  State  organization 
would  any  thing  be  gained  for  the  cause  of  freedom. 
Slavery  exists  by  the  local,  municipal  law ;  and  would 
not  be  abolished,  unless  you  go  one  step  further,  and 
hold,  that,  with  the  loss  of  the  State  organization,  the 
institutions,  laws,  and  civil  relations  of  the  States 
perish.  Now,  in  case  of  conquest  even,  though  the 
people  of  the  conquered  territory  change  their  alle- 
giance, their  relations  to  each  other  and  their  rights  of 
property  remain  undisturbed.  The  modern  usage  of  na- 
tions, which  has  become  law,  would  be  violated  if 
private  property  should  be  generally  confiscated  and 
private  rights  annulled  (United  States  vs.  Percheman, 
7  Peters,  51  ;  3  Phillimore,  p.  743).  When,  therefore, 
States  were  reduced  to  Territories,  the  National  Gov- 
ernment could  not  abolish  slavery  therein,  except  under 
the  right  of  eminent  domain  and  by  giving  just  com- 
pensation. 

If  we  are  right  as  to  the  nullity  of  the  acts  of  seces- 
sion, we  may  proceed  to  inquire  whether  the  fact,  that 
the  seceding  States  have  attempted  to  form  a  new  alii- 


12  RELATION    OF   THE   STATES 

ance  or  confederation,  will  effect  the  result.  Upon 
the  plainest  letter  of  the  Constitution,  as  well  as  by  its 
entire  spirit,  these  acts  of  confederation  are  void.  Con- 
tinuing as  States  in  spite  of  their  ordinances,  they  were 
expressly  forbidden  to  enter  into  any  treaty,  alliance,  or 
confederation,  or  into  any  agreement  or  compact,  with 
another  State  or  with  a  foreign  power  (Constitution,  art. 
1,  sect  10).  Neither  by  secession  nor  confederation  have 
they  changed  their  legal  relation  to  the  Union  and  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  They  are  still  mem- 
bers of  the  Union,  foregoing  for  a  time  its  privileges,  but 
subject  to  its  duties,  bound  to  it  by  a  cord  which  the 
sword  of  successful  revolution  can  alone  sever. 

What,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  is  the  legal  character  of 
this  great  insurrection  ?  The  answer  is,  It  is  a  rebellion 
of  citizens  of  the  United  States  against  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  ;  an  organized  effort  to  subvert  and 
overthrow  its  authority,  and  to  establish  another  Gov- 
ernment in  its  stead.  Nothing  can  be  more  explicit 
than  the  proclamation  of  April  15,  1861 :  — 

"  The  laws  of  the  United  States  have  been  for  some  time  past  and 
now  are  opposed,  and  the  execution  thereof  obstructed,  in  the  States 
of  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  Alabama,  Florida,  Mississippi,  Louisi- 
ana, and  Texas,  by  combinations  too  powerful  to  be  suppressed  by  the 
ordinary  course  of  judicial  proceedings,  or  by  the  powers  vested  in 
the  marshals  by  law. 

"  Now,  therefore,  I,  Abraham  Lincoln,  President  of  the  United 
States,  in  virtue  of  the  power  in  me  vested  by  the  Constitution  and 
the  laws,  have  thought  fit  to  call  forth,  and  hereby  do  call  forth,  the 
militia  of  the  several  States  of  the  Union,  to  the  aggregate  number  of 
seventy-five  thousand,  in  order  to  suppress  said  combinations,  and  to 
cause  the  laws  to  be  duly  executed. 

"  I  appeal  to  all  loyal  citizens  to  favor,  facilitate,  and  aid  this 


TO    THE    UNION.  13 

effort  to  maintain  the  honor,  the  integrity ,  and  the  existence  of  our 
National  Union  and  the  perpetuity  of  popular  Government,  and  to 
redress  wrongs  already  long  enough  endured." 

The  State  organizations  have  been  found  convenient, 
and  have  been  used  for  the  purposes  of  the  Rebellion. 
Those  of  counties  and  cities  have  been  used  for  the 
same  ends.  In  either  case,  it  was  an  entire  perversion 
of  their  functions  ;  and  the  action  is  none  the  less  illegal 
and  revolutionary  on  that  account.  A  State,  as  such, 
having  no  power  to  engage  in  war  with  any  other  State 
or  with  the  United  States,  cannot  interpose  its  shield 
between  the  Government  of  the  United  States  and  its 
subjects  committing  treason  by  levying  war  against  it ; 
nor  is  such  levying  war  any  the  less  treason  because  the 
traitors  held  places  of  trust  in  the  State  Governments, 
and  perverted  the  functions  of  those  Governments  to 
their  base  ends.  Morally,  it  is  an  aggravation  of  the 
offence.  It  does  not  change  its  essential  legal  character. 

In  the  Convention  for  forming  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  Luther  Martin,  of  Maryland,  was  anxious 
to  insert  a  provision  to  save  the  citizens  of  the  States 
from  being  punishable  as  traitors  to  the  United  States 
when  acting  expressly  in  obedience  to  the  authority 
of  their  own  States.  The  provision  offered  by  him 
was,  — 

"  That  no  act  or  acts  done  by  one  or  more  of  the  States  against 
the  United  States,  or  by  any  citizen  of  any  one  of  the  United  States, 
under  the  authority  of  one  or  more  of  the  said  States,  shall  be  deemed 
treason,  or  punished  as  such  ;  but,  in  case  of  war  being  levied  by  one 
or  more  of  the  States  against  the  United  States,  the  conduct  of  each 
party  towards  the  other,  and  their  adherents  respectively,  shall  be 
regulated  by  the  laws  of  war  and  of  nations." 


14  RELATION   OF   THE    STATES 

This  proposition  was  rejected,  Mr.  Martin  says  with 
much  feeling,  because  the  leading  members  of  the  Con- 
vention meant  to  leave  the  States  at  the  mercy  of  the 
National  Government.  The  more  obvious  reason  is, 
that  it  was  inconsistent  with  the  whole  theory  of  the 
Constitution,  which,  springing  from  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  acted  directly  upon  them  as  its  subjects, 
and  with  a  force  which  no  law  or  ordinance  of  a  State 
could  impair. 

This,  then,  is  not  a  conflict  of  States  ;  nor  is  it  a  war 
of  countries  or  of  geographical  lines.  It  is  a  conflict 
between  Government  and  its  disobedient  subjects.  He 
only  is  the  enemy  of  the  United  States  who  is  commit- 
ting treason  by  levying  war  against  the  United  States, 
or  giving  aid  and  comfort  to  those  who  do.  The  loyal, 
faithful  subject  of  the  United  States,  wherever  on  the 
soil  of  his  country  he  may  have  his  home,  is  not 
the  enemy  of  his  country.  No  subtilty  of  logic,  no 
ingenuity  of  legal  construction,  no  misapplication  of 
the  laws  of  international  war  to  this  contest,  can  change 
the  nature  of  things ;  can  convert  loyalty  into  treason, 
or  devotion  into  hostility.  If  there  be  to-day  in  Ten- 
nessee or  Georgia,  or  South  Carolina  even,  a  loyal 
subject  of  the  United  States,  "  faithful  among  the  faith- 
less found,"  the  Government  is  not  at  war  with  him. 
I  am  aware,  that,  as  to  property  taken  on  the  high  seas, 
some  of  the  district  courts  of  the  United  States  have 
held  otherwise  ;  but  I  venture  to  hope,  that  the  court 
of  last  resort  will  affirm  the  doctrine,  stated  by  Mr.  Jus- 
tice Nelson  of  that  court,  to  be  good  sense  and  sound 
law :  — 


TO    THE    UNION.  15 

"  On  the  breaking-out  of  a  war  between  two  nations,  the  citizens 
or  subjects  of  the  respective  belligerents  are  deemed  by  the  law  of 
nations  to  be  the  enemies  of  each  other.  The  same  is  true,  in  a  quali- 
fied sense,  in  the  case  of  a  civil  war  arising  out  of  an  insurrection  or 
rebellion  against  the  mother-government.  But,  in  the  latter  case,  the 
citizens  or  subjects  residing  within  the  insurrectionary  district,  not 
implicated  in  the  rebellion,  but  adhering  to  their  allegiance,  are  not 
enemies,  nor  to  be  regarded  as  such.  This  distinction  was  constantly 
observed  by  the  English  Government  in  the  disturbances  in  Scotland, 
under  the  Pretender  and  his  son,  in  the  years  1715  and  1745.  It 
modifies  the  law  as  it  respects  the  condition  of  the  citizens  or  sub- 
jects, residing  within  the  limits  of  the  revolted  district,  who  remain 
loyal  to  the  Government." 

The  difference  between  a  war  and  a  rebellion  is  clear 
and  vital.  War  is  the  hostile  relation  of  one  nation  to 
another,  involving  all  the  subjects  of  both  :  rebellion 
is  the  relation  which  disloyal  subjects  hold  to  the  na- 
tion, not  involving  or  impairing  the  rights  of  loyal 
subjects.  The  law  may  fail  to  protect  obedient  subjects ; 
but  it  never  condemns  them.  As  between  the  Govern- 
ment, and  its  subjects  in  arms  against  it,  the  legal  relation 
is  not  that  of  war,  notwithstanding  the  war-power  is 
used  to  subdue  and  reduce  them  to  obedience.  Though 
the  Rebellion  has  assumed  gigantic  proportions,  and  the 
civil  power  is  impotent  to  repress  it,  the  array  of  num- 
bers, and  extent  of  physical  force,  do  not  change  its 
essential  legal  character.  It  is  still  treason,  —  the  levy- 
ing of  war  against  the  United  States  by  those  who  owe 
to  it  allegiance.  For  this  exigency  the  Constitution  has 
provided.  The  war-power  of  the  Government  may  be 
evoked  "  to  execute  the  laws  of  the  Union,  and  to  sup- 
press insurrection."  In  levying  war  against  the  United 
States,  the  rebels  do  not  cease  to  be  traitors,  but  are 


16  RELATION   OF   THE    STATES 

doing  the  thing  in  which  the  Constitution  declares  trea- 
son to  consist  (art.  3,  sect.  3). 

While  using  the  powers  and  appliances  of  war  for 
the  purpose  of  subduing  the  Rebellion,  we  are  by  no 
means  acting  without  the  pale  of  the  Constitution.  We 
are  using  precisely  the  powers  with  which  the  Constitu- 
tion has  clothed  us  for  this  end.  We  are  seeking 
domestic  tranquillity  by  the  sword  the  Constitution  has 
placed  in  our  hands.  In  the  path  of  war,  as  of  peace, 
the  Constitution  is  our  guide  and  our  light,  the  cloud  by 
day,  the  pillar  of  fire  by  night. 

While  using  the  powers  of  war  for  executing  the 
laws  and  subduing  rebellion,  we  are,  of  course,  bound 
and  restrained  by  the  laws  of  w*ar.  It  is  our  duty  and 
our  privilege  to  respect  the  maxims  of  humanity  and 
moderation  by  which  the  law  of  nations  and  of  Chris- 
tian civilization  has  tempered  the  spirit  of  modern 
hostilities.  During  the  war,  we  may  recognize  in  the 
rebels  the  rights  of  belligerents ;  may  send  them  flags 
of  truce ;  may  make  with  them  capitulations,  cartels  for 
exchange  of  prisoners ;  and  extend  to  them  the  courte- 
sies which  mitigate,  to  some  extent,  the  iron  rigor  of 
war.  These  things  were  done  in  the  earliest  stages 
of  our  Revolution,  not  only  before  the  separation  of  the 
Colonies  was  declared,  but  before  the  idea  of  inde- 
pendence had  fairly  taken  possession  of  the  public 
mind.  But  it  was  never  supposed,  that,  by  adopting 
the  usages  of  civilized  warfare,  Great  Britain  was  relax- 
ing her  hold  upon  the  Colonies,  or  elevating  them  into 
independent  powers.  Nothing  is,  I  think,  plainer  in 
principle,  than  that  the  recognition  of  these  rights  and 


TO    THE    UNION.  17 

the  observance  of  these  usages  — Jiagrante  bello  —  can- 
not affect  the  legal  relation  of  the  parties ;  does  not 
divest  the  sovereign  of  his  power,  or  release  the  subject 
from  his  duties,  when  the  strife  of  arms  ceases.  It  is 
only  when  rebellion  has  ripened  into  successful  revolu- 
tion, that  the  permanent  legal  relations  of  the  parties 
are  changed.  The  recognition  of  the  "  belligerent  rights" 
of  the  rebels  by  foreign  powers,  can,  as  between  the 
sovereign  and  his  subjects,  have  no  other  or  further 
effect.  Such  recognition  (if  known  to  the  law  of  na- 
tions) proceeds  upon  the  ground,  that  the  revolution  is 
not  accomplished,  and  that  the  connection  is  not  dissolved. 
Had  this  been  done,  the  recognition  would  have  been 
of  their  separate  national  existence. 

In  my  humble  judgment,  Mr.  Chairman,  the  "  seceded 
States  "  (so  called),  and  the  people  of  those  States,  are 
to-day  integral  parts  of  the  Union,  over  whom,  when 
the  conflict  of  arms  ceases,  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  the  laws  made  under  it,  will  resume 
their  peaceful  sway.  Traitors  may  perish  ;  some  insti- 
tutions may  perish :  the  nation  will  remain ;  and  the 
States  will  remain,  essential  parts  of  the  body  politic. 
"  The  body  is  one,  and  hath  many  members  ;  and  all 
the  members  of  that  body,  being  many,  are  one  body." 

With  this  brief  and  imperfect  development  of  the 
principles  involved  in  this  great  controversy,  I  proceed 
to  a  more  direct  consideration  of  the  subjects  of  confis- 
cation and  emancipation. 

In  seeking  to  know  what  this  Government  ought  to 
do  in  relation  to  the  confiscation  of  private  property,  or 
the  emancipation  of  slaves,  in  the  "seceding"  States,  the 

3 


18  CONFISCATION. 

obvious  question  presenting  itself  to  every  mind  at 
the  threshold  is,  What  is  the  end  which  the  Government 
and  the  people  are  seeking  to  attain  ?  There  can  be 
but  one  loyal  answer  to  that  question.  It  is  to  preserve 
the  Union  and  the  Constitution  in  their  integrity;  to 
vindicate  in  every  part  of  this  indivisible  Republic  its 
supreme  law.  No  purpose,  however  humane,  benefi- 
cent, or  attractive,  can  divert  our  steps  from  the  plain, 
straight  path  of  sworn  duty.  What  is  writ  is  writ.  In 
seeking  to  change  it  by  force  of  arms,  we  become  the 
rebels  we  are  striving  to  subdue. 

It  is  a  plain  proposition,  that,  in  seeking  to  enforce 
the  law,  we  are,  as  far  as  possible,  to  obey  the  law. 
We  are  not  to  destroy  in  seeking  to  preserve.  The 
people  do  not  desire  a  bitter  and  remorseless  struggle 
over  the  dead  body  of  the  Constitution.  We  may  raise 
armies  and  navies,  and  pour  out  as  water  the  treasure 
and  life-blood  of  the  people ;  but  we  can  neither  think 
nor  act  wisely,  live  well,  or  die  well,  for  the  Republic, 
unless  we  keep  clearly  and  always  in  view  the  end  of 
all  our  labors  and  sacrifices,  —  the  Union  of  our  fathers, 
and  the  Constitution,  which  is  its  only  bond.  No 
thoughtful  man  can  believe  there  is  a  possibility  of 
reconstructing  the  Union  on  any  other  basis ;  or  that  it 
is  within  the  province  of  Congress,  in  any  other  but  the 
peaceful  way  of  amendment,  to  make  the  effort. 

The  bills  and  joint  resolutions  before  the  House,  pro- 
pose, with  some  differences  of  policy  and  method,  two 
measures,  —  the  confiscation  of  the  property  of  the 
rebels,  and  the  emancipation  of  their  slaves.  Some  of 
the  resolutions  propose  the  abolition  of  slavery  itself, 


CONFISCATION.  19 

with  compensation  for  loyal  masters.  It  is  my  duty  to 
examine,  as  briefly  as  I  may,  the  wisdom,  the  justice, 
and  the  constitutionality  of  the  measures  proposed. 
And,  first,  of  confiscation. 

The  propositions  for  confiscation  include  the  entire 
property  of  the  rebels,  real  and  personal,  for  life  and  in 
fee.  Within  the  class  whose  estates  are  to  be  confis- 
cated are  included  not  only  those  personally  engaged  in 
the  Rebellion,  in  arms  against  the  Government,  but 
also  those  who  adhere  to  them,  giving  them  aid  or  com- 
fort: so  that  within  the  sweep  of  the  bills  would  be 
brought  substantially  the  property  of  eleven  States  and 
six  millions  of  people. 

The  mind  instinctively  shrinks  from  a  proposition 
like  this.  It  relucts  to  include  in  one  "  fell  swoop  "  a 
whole  people.  It  asks  anxiously,  if  no  consideration  is 
to  be  had  for  different  degrees  of  guilt ;  if  the  same 
measure  is  to  be  meted  to  those  who  organized  the 
Rebellion  and  those  who  have  been  forced  into  it ;  if  no 
consideration  is  to  be  given  to  the  fact,  that  allegiance 
arid  protection  are  reciprocal  duties;  and  that,  for  the 
last  ten  months,  the  National  Government  has  found 
itself  incapable  of  giving  protection  to  its  loyal  subjects 
in  the  "seceding  States,"  —  neither  defending  them, 
nor  giving  them  arms  to  defend  themselves ;  and  that, 
deprived  of  our  protection  and  incapable  of  resistance, 
they  have  yielded  only  to  superior  force  ;  if  a  wise 
Government  is  to  forget  the  nature  of  man  and  the 
influences  of  birth,  of  soil,  of  home,  of  society,  and  of 
State,  by  which  his  opinions  are  insensibly  moulded  ;  and 
that  this  pestilent  heresy  of  the  right  of  secession,  fatal 


20  CONFISCATION. 

as  it  is  now  seen  to  be,  not  only  to  the  existence  of  good 
government,  but  of  social  order  itself,  lias  been  a  cardi- 
nal article  in  the  faith  of  a  large  portion  of  the  people  in 
the  Southern  States ;  and  that  they  have  been  induced, 
by  the  arts  and  sophistries  and  falsehoods  of  unprin- 
cipled leaders,  to  believe  that  their  future  safety  and 
well-being  required  the  exercise  of  the  right.  Those 
leaders  should  atone  for  their  crime  by  the  just  penalty 
of  the  law.  But  you  cannot,  says  Burke,  indict  "  a 
whole  people ; "  you  cannot  apply  to  them  the  ordinary 
rules  of  criminal  jurisprudence.  To  state  the  propo- 
sition to  confiscate  the  property  of  eleven  States  is  to 
confute  it ;  is  to  shock  our  common  sense,  and  sense  of 
justice ;  is  to  forget  not  only  the  ties  of  history  and 
of  kindred,  but  those  of  a  common  humanity;  is  to 
excite  the  indignation  of  the  civilized  world,  and  to  in- 
voke the  interposition  of  all  Christian  governments. 

It  is  said  that  just  retaliation  requires  the  confisca- 
tion of  the  property  of  the  rebels.  Doubtless  nations 
may  feel  compelled  to  resort  to  measures  of  severe 
retaliation  ;  it  may  be  their  only  security  against  future 
outrage :  but  a  firmly  established  government  does  not 
resort  to  cruelty  and  injustice  because  its  rebellious 
subjects  have  done  so.  It  must  maintain  a  higher 
standard  of  rectitude  and  justice.  Its  object  is,  not 
vengeance,  but  to  deter  men  from  crime.  It  knows 
that  harsh  and  severe  punishments  but  rouse  pity 
for  the  criminal,  and  indignation  against  the  Govern- 
ment. 

Nor  will  the  difference  between  confiscation  by  the 
rebels  and  by  this  Government  be  overlooked.  Our 


CONFISCATION.  21 

acts  of  confiscation,  if  within  the  limits  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, are  effective  and  permanent :  theirs,  void  in  law, 
are  temporary  in  their  effect.  The  title  to  one  square 
inch  of  land  will  not  be  changed  by  any  confiscation  by 
the  rebel  authorities.  Every  man  who  has  occupied 
the  land  of  a  loyal  citizen  under  their  pretended  acts  of 
confiscation  will  be  liable  for  the  full  rent  and  damages 
to  the  estate.  Every  man  who  is  in  possession  of 
personal  property  under  them  will  be  compelled  to 
disgorge.  Every  debt  paid  under  them  into  rebel  trea- 
suries will  still  be  due  to  the  loyal  creditor.  The  resto- 
ration and  indemnity  will,  I  know,  be  imperfect.  Many 
grievous  wrongs  will  go  unredtessed ;  but  every  rebel, 
whatsoever  functions  he  may  have  usurped, — judicial 
or  executive,  —  who  has  invaded  the  rights  of  person  or 
of  property  of  a  loyal  citizen,  will  be  liable  to  his  last 
farthing  for  indemnity.  .  So  far,  therefore,  as  our  Go- 
vernment confiscates  the  property  of  rebels  to  its  own 
use,  it  takes  from  the  loyal  citizen  the  sources  to  which 
he  may  justly  look  for  redress. 

The  acts  of  general  confiscation  proposed  would  de- 
feat the  great  end  the  Government  has  in  view,  —  the 
restoration  of  order,  union,  and  obedience  to  law.  They 
would  take  from  the  rebels  every  motive  for  submission  ; 
they  would  create  the  strongest  possible  motives  to  con- 
tinued resistance.  In  the  maintenance  of  the  Confede- 
rate Government,  they  might  possibly  find  protection ; 
in  the  restoration  of  ours,  spoliation.  Spoliatis  arma 
supersunt.  You  leave  them  the  great  weapon  of  de- 
spair. Sallust  said  of  the  old  Romans,  "  Majores  nostri 
religiosissimi  mortales  nihil  victis  eripiebant  prrcter  inju- 


22  CONFISCATION. 

ri{£  licentiam,"  —  "Our  ancestors,  the  most  religious  of 
men,  took  from  the  vanquished  nothing  but  the  license 
of  wrong-doing,"  —  "words,"  says  Grotius,  "worthy  of 
having  been  said  by  a  Christian." 

It  seems  to  be  taken  for  granted,  that  our  efforts  to 
suppress  the  Rebellion  will  be  successful  in  proportion 
to  the  severity  of  the  measures  we  adopt.  The  assump- 
tion is  at  war  with  the  lessons  of  history  and  with  the 
nature  of  man.  The  most  vigorous  prosecution  of 
the  war  possible  is  best  for  the  Government  and  its  sub- 
jects in  arms  against  it.  But  the  war  is  means  to  an 
end.  "Wise  men  labor  in  the  hope  of  rest,  and  make 
war  for  the  sake  of  peace."  It  is  only  when  justice  is 
tempered  with  mercy  that  it  is  justice. 

Apart  from  the  injustice  and  impolicy  of  these  acts  of 
sweeping  confiscation,  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  in 
the  Constitution  the  requisite  authority  to  pass  them. 
There  are  two  aspects  in  which  the  legal  question  may 
be  viewed,  — first,  the  confiscation  and  forfeiture  of  pro- 
perty as  the  punishment  for  crime ;  secondly,  under  what 
has  popularly  been  called  the  "  war-power "  of  the 
Government. 

Looking  at  confiscation  as  the  penalty  of  crime,  trea- 
son, or  any  lower  grade  of  offence,  some  things  seem  to 
be  plain :  — 

That  such  forfeiture  can  be  created  by  statutes  appli- 
cable only  to  offences  committed  after  their  passage. 
Congress  cannot  pass  an  ex  post  facto  law  (Constitu- 
tion, art.  1,  sect.  9). 

The  subject  charged  with  treason  may  justly  claim  all 
the  muniments  and  safeguards  of  the  Constitution. 


CONFISCATION.  23 

He  cannot  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property, 
without  due  process  of  law  (Amendments,  art.  5) ;  that 
is,  judicial  process,  as  understood  from  the  days  of 
Magna  Carta. 

He  cannot  be  held  to  answer  for  a  capital  or  other- 
wise infamous  crime,  except  in  cases  arising  in  the  land 
or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in  actual  service 
in  time  of  war  or  public  danger,  unless  on  present- 
ment or  indictment  by  a  grand  jury  (ibid.). 

After  indictment,  he  must  have  a  trial  by  an  impartial 
jury  of  the  State  and  district  wherein  the  crime  shall 
have  been  committed;  which  district  shall  have  been 
previously  ascertained  by  law  (art.  3,  sect.  2 ;  Amend- 
ments, art.  6). 

No  attainder  of  treason  can  work  a  forfeiture,  except 
during  the  life  of  the  person  attainted  (Constitution, 
art.  3,  sect.  2).  By  attainder  is  here  clearly  meant  judi- 
cial attainder ;  as  a  bill  of  attainder  (that  is,  an  act  of 
the  Legislature)  is,  by  a  prior  provision  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, expressly  forbidden  (art.  1,  sect.  9). 

These  sacred  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  which,  as 
common-law  muniments  of  life,  liberty,  and  property, 
have  existed  in  substance  for  six  centuries,  —  "  the  least 
feeling  their  care,  and  the  greatest  not  exempted  from 
their  power,"  —  lie  directly  in  the  path,  and  are  fatal 
obstructions  to  any  legislation  confiscating  property  as 
the  penalty  of  treason,  except  as  the  result  of  the  judi- 
cial trial  and  sentence  of  the  offender. 

It  has  been  assumed,  —  I  think,  without  sufficient  re- 
flection, —  that,  under  our  laws  against  treason,  the  most 
obnoxious  traitors  even  will  escape  the  righteous  punish- 


24  CONFISCATION. 

ment  of  their  crimes,  because  they  must  be  tried  by  a 
jury  in  the  State  and  district  wherein  the  offence  shall 
have  been  committed.  Their  only  escape  will  be  by 
exile.  Where  war  is  actually  levied  against  the  United 
States,  where  bodies  of  men  have  been  actually  assem- 
bled to  effect  by  force  of  arms  their  treasonable  pur- 
poses, all  those  who  perform  any  part,  however  minute 
or  however  remote  from  the  scene  of  action,  and  who 
are  actually  leagued  in  the  general  conspiracy,  are  to  be 
considered  as  traitors  (Ex  parte  Bolman,  &c.,  4  Cranch, 
75).  We  have  not,  indeed,  adopted  the  law  of  con- 
structive presence,  which  holds  that  a  man  who  incites 
or  procures  a  treasonable  act,  is,  by  force  of  the  incite- 
ment or  procurement  merely,  legally  present  at  the  act. 
But  it  may  be  sufficient  to  constitute  presence,  if  he  is 
in  a  situation  in  which  he  can  co-operate  with  any  act  of 
hostility,  or  furnish  counsel  and  assistance  to  the  parties 
if  attacked  (United  States  vs.  Burr,  4  Cranch,  470). 
The  modern  facilities  of  communication  greatly  enlarge 
the  field  of  co-operation.  A  commander  at  the  end  of  a 
telegraph-wire,  directing  the  assault  upon  a  fort  of  the 
United  States,  or  at  a  railroad  station  with  troops  ready 
to  be  moved  to  the  assistance  of  the  rebel  army  in 
action,  is,  in  law,  present  at  the  overt  acts  of  treason. 
The  leaders  of  this  Rebellion  will  be  found,  therefore,  to 
have  committed  treason,  and  to  be  liable  to  indictment 
and  trial  in  many  States  and  districts  in  which  a  jury 
will  be  ready,  upon  adequate  proof,  to  convict. 

In  the  proposed  measures,  the  thing  sought  to  be 
done  is  the  confiscation  of  the  property  of  the  rebel 
as  the  penalty  of  his  offence,  and  the  attainment  of  this 


CONFISCATION.  25 

end  without  the  trial  and  conviction  of  the  offender. 
Though,  under  the  Constitution,  upon  a  trial  and  convic- 
tion of  a  traitor,  you  can  only  take  the  life  estate,  these 
measures  assume,  that,  without  any  trial  or  conviction, 
you  may  take  the  fee-simple.  Our  legal  instincts  shrink 
from  such  a  proposition.  Its  intrinsic  difficulties  have 
been  seen  and  felt ;  and  a  resort  has  been  had  to  analo- 
gies and  precedents,  judicial  and  legislative,  to  find  for 
it  some  sanction  and  support;  I  think,  without  suc- 
cess. 

1.  It  is  true,  as  has  been  said,  that,  under  the  Consti- 
tution, men  may  be  deprived  of  life  and  property  without 
trial  by  jury.    Cases  arising  in  the  land  and  naval  forces, 
and  in  the  militia  when  in  actual  service  in  time  of  war 
or  public  danger,  are  in  terms  excepted  from  the  gene- 
ral rule  (Amendments,  art.  5) ;   but  the  exception,  in- 
stead of  impairing,  by  the  law  of  logic  as  of  common 
sense,  confirms  the  rule. 

2.  Property  is  taken  for  taxes,  and  certainly  without 
•   trial  by  jury,  where  the  tax,  and  mode  of  assessment,  are 

valid ;  but  this  is  under  an  express  grant  of  power  to 
Congress  "  to  lay  and  collect  taxes"  (art.  1,  sect.  8),  the 
principle  and  general  method  of  which  were  perfectly 
well  understood  when  the  Constitution  was  adopted. 
Nor  does  the  exercise  of  this  power,  as  has  been  sug- 
gested, take  private  property  for  public  use  without  just 
compensation :  on  the  contrary,  the  true  and  just  theory 
of  taxation  is,  that  the  price  paid  is  the  reasonable  com- 
pensation for  the  protection  and  security  of  life,  liberty, 
and  property,  which  a  wise  and  efficient  government 
affords. 

4 


26  CONFISCATION. 

3.  The  forfeiture  of  goods  for  breach  of  the  revenue- 
laws  has  slight,  if  any,  analogy  to  the  confiscation  of 
property  as  a  punishment  for  the  crime  of  its  owner. 
To  Congress  is  given  the  power  to  "  regulate  com- 
merce," and  "  to  levy  and  collect  imports ; "  and,  of 
course,  to  prescribe  the  terms  and  conditions  upon 
which  goods  may  be  imported.  It  may  well  avail  itself 
of  a  familiar  principle  by  which  property  used  in  violat- 
ing, defeating,  or  defrauding  the  law  is  liable  to  forfeit- 
ure. Though  the  forfeiture  of  the  common  law  did 
not,  strictly  speaking,  attach  in  rem,  but  was  a  part 
or  consequence  of  the  judgment  of  conviction  of  the 
offender,  this  doctrine  was  never  applied  to  seizures  and 
forfeitures  created  by  statute  in  rem,  and  cognizable  on 
the  revenue  side  of  the  exchequer.  The  thing  was  then 
primarily  considered  as  the  offender,  and  the  offence  was 
attached  to  it.  The  same  principle  is  applied  to  pro- 
ceedings in  rem,  and  seizures  in  the  admiralty  (2  Whea- 
ton,  The  Palmyra).  It  is  upon  this  distinction  that  the 
statutes  of  July  19  and  of  Aug.  6,  1861,  find  their  sup- 
port. The  principle  is,  that  the  thing  used  in  violating 
the  law  may  be  seized  and  condemned  without  a  judg- 
ment upon  the  guilt  of  the  owner. 

I  proceed  to  inquire  how  far,  if  at  all,  the  powers  of 
Congress  are  enlarged  by  the  existence  of  this  Kebellion, 
and  the  use  of  the  appliances  of  war  to  subdue  it. 

It  would  seem  to  be  plain,  that  the  resistance  of  any 
portion  of  the  people  to  the  Constitution  and  laws  can- 
not operate  to  confer  upon  Congress  any  new  substan- 
tive power,  or  to  abrogate  any  limitations  of  the  powers 
of  Congress  which  the  people  have  imposed.  When 


CONFISCATION.  27 

the  Constitution  intends  that  the  existence  of  war  or 
rebellion  shall  put  an  end  to  any  restriction  on  the 
power  of  the  Government,  it  says  so  :  when  it  does  not 
say  so,  the  fair  inference  is  that  it  does  not  mean  so. 
Examples  of  such  removals  of  restraint  are  found  in 
article  one,  section  eight,  providing  that  the  privilege  of 
the  "  writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  not  be  suspended,  un- 
less when,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion,  the  public 
safety  may  require  it ; "  and  in  article  three  of  the 
Amendments,  forbidding,  in  time  of  peace,  the  quarter- 
ing of  soldiers  in  any  house  without  the  consent  of  the 
owner,  but  in  time  of  war  permitting  it  to  be  done  "  in 
a  manner  to  be  prescribed  by  law." 

Engaged  in  suppressing  a  great  and  formidable  rebel- 
lion, the  Government  may  use  the  instrumentalities  of 
war,  so  far  as  they  are  adapted  to  the  end :  but  it  is 
never  freed  from  the  restraints  of  the  Constitution ;  can 
never  rise  above  it.  The  Constitution  is  never  silent  in 
the  midst  of  arms.  In  war,  as  in  peace,  it  is  the  su- 
preme law ;  itself  solus  populi  et  suprema  lex. 

When  Government  is  compelled  to  use  the  power  of 
war,  it  observes  its  limitations.  How  far,  in  the  use 
of  this  power,  it  may  confiscate,  or  subject  to  forfeiture, 
private  property,  is  the  next  question  before  us. 

Some  things  are  tolerably  well  settled.  That  property 
used  in  promoting  the  rebellion,  in  levying  war  against 
the  United  States,  is  lawful  prize  of  war.  This  would 
include  the  arms,  munitions,  and  provisions  of  war,  in 
actual  use  or  procured  for  the  purpose.  The  rule  ex- 
tends to  goods  used,  not  strictly  as  munitions  or  imple- 
ments of  war,  but  so  as  to  defeat  the  military  and  naval 


28  CONFISCATION. 

operations  resorted  to  to  subdue  the  rebellion :  as  goods 
on  their  way  to  relieve  besieged  towns  or  forts ;  or  ships 
or  cargo  violating  a  blockade,  or  proceeding  to  or  from 
ports  with  which  commercial  intercourse  has  been  inter- 
dicted. It  may  extend  to  ships  and  cargo  upon  the  high 
seas,  the  property  of  those  levying  war  against  the 
United  States ;  enemies,  not  because  of  their  domicile  or 
residence  upon  one  part  rather  than  another  of  the  ter- 
ritory of  the  Union,  but  because  they  are  in  arms 
against  it. 

Perhaps  we  should  add  to  these,  requisitions  or  con- 
tributions, within  military  districts,  levied  upon  those  at 
war  with  the  Government,  for  the  support  of  the  invad- 
ing army.  Such  requisitions  were,  however,  regarded 
by  Wellington,  a  great  statesman  as  well  as  great  com- 
mander, as  iniquitous ;  as  a  system  for  which  the 
British  soldier  was  unfit.  I  would  refer  also  to  the  ex- 
cellent remarks  on  this  subject  by  President  Woolsey, 
in  his  admirable  Introduction  to  "  International  Law," 
p.  304. 

Beyond  the  points  suggested,  it  is  believed  the  usages 
of  international  war  do  not  extend.  By  the  modern 
usages  of  nations,  private  property  on  the  land  is  ex- 
empt from  confiscation.-  This  exemption,  Mr.  Wheaton 
says  (and  there  is  no  higher  authority),  is  now  held  to 
extend  "  to  cases  of  the  absolute  and  unqualified  con- 
quest of  the  enemy's  country "  (Wheaton's  "  Elements 
of  International  Law,"  p.  421).  We  refer  also,  as 
tending  to  the  same  result,  to  Vattel,  book  3,  chap.  8, 
sect.  147 ;  to  1  Kent's  "  Commentaries,"  pp.  102,  104  ; 
3  Phillimore,  p.  140  ;  Woolsey,  p.  304.  To  this  miti- 


CONFISCATION.  29 

gated  rule  of  war,  there  are  doubtless  exceptions.     Of 
these,  Mr.  Wheaton  says,  — 

"  The  exceptions  to  these  general  mitigations  of  the  extreme  rights 
of  war,  considered  as  a  contest  of  force,  all  grow  out  of  the  same 
original  principle  of  natural  law,  which  authorizes  us  to  use  against 
an  enemy  such  a  degree  of  violence,  and  such  only,  as  may  be  neces- 
sary to  secure  the  object  of  hostilities.  The  same  general  rule  which 
determines  how  far  it  is  lawful  to  destroy  the  persons  of  enemies,  will 
serve  as  a  guide  in  judging  how  far  it  is  lawful  to  ravage  or  lay  waste 
their  country.  If  this  be  necessary  in  order  to  accomplish  the  just 
ends  of  war,  it  may  be  lawfully  done  ;  but  not  otherwise.  Thus,  if 
the  progress  of  an  enemy  cannot  be  stopped,  nor  our  own  frontier 
secured,  or  if  the  approaches  to  a  town  intended  to  be  attacked  can- 
not be  made,  without  laying  waste  the  intermediate  territory,  the  ex- 
treme case  may  justify  a  resort  to  measures  not  warranted  by  the 
ordinary  purposes  of  war."  —  Page  421. 

The  exceptions  growing  out  of  military  exigencies, 
and  measured  and  governed  by  them,  cannot  be  foreseen 
and  provided  for  by  legislation,  but  must  be  left,  where 
the  law  of  nations  leaves  them,  with  the  military  com- 
mander. 

It  has  been  said  that  these  acts  of  general  confisca- 
tion find  support  under  the  provision  of  the  Constitution 
which  authorizes  Congress  "  to  make  rules  concerning 
captures  by  land  and  water."  The  Constitution  does 
not  define  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  captures."  It 
refers  us  in  such  cases  to  the  law  of  nations,  as  in  others 
to  the  common  law.  Congress  has  power  to  declare 
"  war."  What  war  is,  the  just  causes  of  war,  the  rights 
and  duties  of  nations  in  conducting  it,  are  to  be  found 
in  the  law  of  nations.  The  "  captures  "  referred  to  are 
very  plainly  not  seizures  of  property  under  legal  pro- 
cess, confiscation,  or  forfeiture,  but  the  taking  of  enemy's 


30  CONFISCATION. 

property  by  force  or  strategy,  jure  victories.  The  title  is 
acquired  by  capture,  and  liable  to  be  lost  by  recapture. 
To  make  rules  concerning  "  captures "  is  not  to  make 
rules  in  conflict  with  or  beyond  the  law  of  nations.  The 
extent  to  which  the  power  conferred  by  the  law  of  na- 
tions shall  be  exercised,  and  the  disposition  to  be  had  of 
captures  when  made,  are  the  proper  subjects  of  munici- 
pal law,  and  of  the  provision  of  the  Constitution. 

The  case  of  Brown  vs.  the  United  States  (8  Cranch, 
110)  has  been  cited  as  expressly  deciding  that  Congress 
has  power  to  pass  a  confiscation  bill.  I  submit,  with 
great  respect,  that  it  decides  no  such  thing.  The  only 
point  decided  in  the  case  was,  that  British  property 
found  in  the  United  States,  on  land,  at  the  commence- 
ment of  international  hostilities  (war  of  1812),  could  not 
be  condemned  as  enemy's  property,  without  an  act  of 
Congress  for  that  purpose.  The  court,  dealing  with  a 
question  arising  under  war  with  a  foreign  nation,  had  no 
occasion  to  consider  the  powers  or  duties  of  Congress 
in  the  case  of  rebellion.  The  discussions  of  the  court 
recognize  a  distinction  between  the  right  of  the  sove- 
reign to  take  the  persons  and  confiscate  the  property  of 
the  enemy  wherever  found,  and  the  mitigations  of  the 
rule  which  the  humane  usages  of  modern  times  have 
introduced.  With  all  my  reverence  for  the  great  magis- 
trate who  delivered  the  opinion  of  the  court,  I  must  be 
permitted  to  say,  that  usage  is  itself  the  principal  source 
of  the  law  of  nations,  and  that  these  humane  usages 
have  become  the  rules  of  war  in  Christian  States.  The 
law  of  nations,  says  Bynkershoek,  is  only  a  presumption 
founded  on  usage  (Deforo  Legatorum,  chap.  18,  sect.  6). 


CONFISCATION.  31 

It  is  suggested,  that,  if  the  confiscation  of  private 
property  violated  the  law  of  nations,  the  courts  could 
not  overrule  the  interpretation  of  that  law  by  the  politi- 
cal department  of  the  Government,  and  that  no  other 
power  could  intervene.  Possibly  this  may  be  so ;  but 
surely  it  is  not  intended  that  we  shall  violate  the  law  of 
nations  in  dealing  with  our  subjects,  because  there  is  no 
appeal  or  redress  for  the  subject.  It  is  in  the  exercise 
of  irresponsible  power  that  the  nicest  sense  of  justice, 
and  the  greatest  caution  and  forbearance,  are  demanded. 
In  suppressing  a  rebellion  so  atrocious,  marked  by  such 
fury  and  hate  against  a  Government  felt  only  in  its  bless- 
ings, forbearance  seems  to  us  weakness,  and  vengeance 
the  noblest  of  virtues ;  but,  in  our  calmer  moments,  we 
hear  the  Divine  Voice :  "  Vengeance  is  mine ;  I  will 
repay." 

I  conclude  what  I  have  to  say  upon  this  branch  of  the 
subject  with  the  remark,  that,  in  substance  and  effect, 
the  bills  before  the  House  seek  the  permanent  forfeiture 
and  confiscation  of  property,  real  and  personal,  without 
the  trial  of  the  offender.  I  am  unable  to  see  how,  un- 
der the  Constitution,  that  result  can  be  reached. 

The  temporary  use  of  property  in  districts  under  mili- 
tary occupation,  and  of  estates  abandoned  by  their 
owners,  rests  upon  distinct  principles,  which  it  is  not 
now  necessary  to  consider.  We  have  only  to  remark, 
in  passing,  that  the  use  of  such  property  and  the  rule 
in  such  districts  can  be  provisional  only,  waiting  the 
regular  action  of  the  State  governments,  and  in  no  way 
impairing  their  permanent  powers. 

I  proceed  to  the  question  of  the  deepest  interest  in- 


32  EMANCIPATION. 

volved  in  this  discussion. — the  emancipation  of  slaves  in 
the  "seceding  States."  There  is  no  subject  on  which 
our  feelings  are  so  likely  to  warp  our  judgment ;  in 
which  calmness  is  so  necessary  and  so  difficult,  and 
declamation  so  easy  or  so  useless.  The  general  princi- 
ples stated  in  relation  to  the  power  and  duty  of  Congress 
as  to  confiscation  are  applicable  to  the  subject  of  eman- 
cipation. 

On  the  question  of  policy,  the  plausible  and  attractive 
argument  is,  that  the  only  effectual  way  to  suppress 
rebellion  is  to  remove  its  cause.  The  position,  when 
thoroughly  probed,  is,  not  that  the  National  Government 
has  not  the  power  to  put  down  the  rebellion  without 
resort  t9  emancipation,  but  that  the  continued  existence 
of  slavery  is  incompatible  with  the  future  safety  of  the 
Republic.  This  plainly  is  not  a  question  of  present 
military  necessity,  but  one  affecting  the  permanent 
structure  of  the  Government,  and  involving  material 
changes  in  the  Constitution.  This  can  be  done  in  one 
of  two  ways :  in  the  method  the  Constitution  points  out ; 
or  by  successful  revolution  on  the  part  of  the  free 
States,  and  the  entire  subjugation  of  the  slave  States. 
No  man  can  foresee  to-day  what  policy  a  severe  and 
protracted  struggle  may  render  necessary.  It  is  suffi- 
cient to  say,  that  into  such  a  war  of  conquest  and  exter- 
mination the  people  of  the  United  States  have  no  present 
disposition  to  enter.  They  have  too  thorough  a  convic- 
tion of  the  capacity  of  the  Government  to  subdue  the 
Rebellion  by  the  means  the  Constitution  sanctions,  to  be 
desirous  of  looking  beyond  its  pale. 

Upon   the   legal    aspect  of  the  question,  it  may  be 


EMANCIPATION.  33 

stated,  as  a  general  proposition,  that  Congress,  in  time 
of  peace,  has  no  power  over  slavery  in  the  States.  By 
that  is  meant  the  institution  itself;  for  the  National 
Government  may,  in  my  judgment,  forfeit  the  right  of 
the  master  in  the  labor  of  the  slave,  as  a  penalty  for 
crime  of  which  the  master  shall  be  convicted;  and,  when 
so  forfeited,  it  may  dispose  of  the  right  as  it  sees  fit. 
Nor  is  there  any  intrinsic  difficulty  in  the  use  of  this  spe- 
cies of  property  under  the  right  of  eminent  domain.  If 
the  Government  were  constructing  a  fort  or  digging  an 
intrenchment,  it  might  hire  this  species  of  labor,  or,  if 
necessary,  take  it,  as  it  might  other  labor  or  property, 
giving  reasonable  compensation  therefor. 

The  provision  as  to  the  return  of  fugitives  from  ser- 
vice cannot  be  deemed  an  exception  to  the  general  rule 
before  stated ;  for  the  provision  applies  to  escapes  from 
one  State  into  another,  and  not  to  escapes  within  the 
State.  Of  which  we  may  remark,  in  passing,  that,  as  to 
the  former  class,  the  power  of  the  Government  is  strictly 
civil,  to  be  executed  by  judicial  process ;  and  that,  as  to 
the  latter,  the  National  Government,  in  time  of  war  or 
peace,  has  no  concern. 

Nor  would  an  act  of  the  National  Government  liberat- 
ing the  slaves  within  a  State,  having  the  consent  of  the 
State  and  providing  compensation  for  the  masters,  mili- 
tate with  the  rule.  Conventio  vincet  leg  em.  The  consent 
of  the  State  would  relieve  the  difficulty. 

But  the  question  arises,  how  far  the  existence  of  the 
Rebellion  confers  upon  Congress  any  new  power  over 
the  relation  of  master  and  slave.  Strictly  speaking,  no 
new  power  is  conferred  upon  any  department  of  the 


34  EMANCIPATION. 

Government  by  war  or  rebellion;  but  it  may  have 
powers  to  be  used  in  those  exigencies  which  are  dormant 
in  time  of  peace.  Such,  for  example,  are  the  power  to 
call  out  the  militia  (art.  1,  sect.  8),  to  try  by  martial  law 
cases  arising  in  the  militia  (Amendments,  5),  to  sus- 
pend the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  (art.  1,  sect.  9),  to  quarter 
troops  in  private  houses  (Amendments,  3).  But,  when 
the  National  Government  is  called  to  the  stern  duty  of 
repressing  insurrection  or  repelling  invasion,  may  not 
new  power  over  the  relation  of  master  and  slave  be 
brought  into  action'?  Such,  I  think,  is  the  result. 

A  plain  case  is  presented  by  slaves  employed  in  the 
military  and  naval  service  of  the  rebels.  If  captured, 
they  may  be  set  free. 

The  Government  may  refuse  to  return  a  slave  to  a 
master  who  has  been  engaged  in  the  Rebellion,  or  suf- 
fered the  slave  to  be  employed  in  it. 

It  may  require  the  services  of  all  persons  subject  to 
its  jurisdiction  by  residing  upon  its  territory,  when  the 
exigency  arises,  to  aid  in  executing  the  laws,  in  repress- 
ing insurrection,  or  repelling  invasion.  This  right  is,  in 
my  judgment,  paramount  to  any  claim  of  the  master  to 
his  labor,  under  the  local  law.  There  might  be  a  ques- 
tion of  the  duty  of  the  slave  to  obey ;  but  the  will  of  the 
master  could  not  intervene.  His  claim,  if  any,  would  be 
a  reasonable  compensation  for  the  labor  of  his  slave. 

But,  though  the  power  may  exist,  there  is,  with  pru- 
dent and  humane  men,  no  desire  to  use  it.  Nothing 
but  the  direst  extremity  would  excuse  the  use  of  a 
power  fraught  with  so  great  perils  to  both  races ;  and 
the  recent  triumphs  of  our  arms,  evincing  our  capacity 


EMANCIPATION.  35 

to  subdue  the  Rebellion  without  departure  from  the 
usages  of  civilized  warfare,  have,  I  trust,  indefinitely 
postponed  the  question. 

There  is  one  other  exigency  in  which  the  relation  of 
master  and  slave  must  give  way  to  military  necessity. 
If  the  commander  of  a  military  district  shall  find  that 
the  slaves  within  it,  by  the  strength  they  give  to  their 
rebellious  masters,  —  by  bearing  arms,  or  doing  other 
military  service,  or  acting  as  the  servants  of  those  who 
do,  —  obstruct  his  efforts  to  subdue  the  Rebellion,  he 
may  deprive  the  enemy  of  this  force,  and  may  remove 
the  obstruction,  by  giving  freedom  to  the  slaves.  This, 
it  is  apparent,  is  not  a  civil  or  legislative,  but  a  strictly 
military  right  and  power,  springing  from  the  exigency, 
and  measured  and  limited  by  it,  to  be  used  for  the  sub- 
duing of  the  enemy,  and  for  no  ulterior  purpose.  If  the 
commander-in-chief  and  th.e  generals  under  him  shall 
observe  faithfully  this  distinction,  the  use  of  the  power 
ought  to  be  no  just  ground  of  complaint.  If,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  protraction  of  the  war,  the  effect  of  the 
use  of  this  power  should  be  to  put  an  end  to  slavery  in 
any  of  the  States,  or  to  weaken  and  impair  its  force,  we 
may  justly  thank  God  for  bringing  good  out  of  evil. 

In  my  judgment,  it  would  be  impracticable  for  the 
Legislature,  even  if  it  had  the  power,  to  anticipate  by 
any  general  statute  the  exigencies  or  prescribe  the  rules 
for  the  exercise  of  this  power.  The  Legislature  and  the 
people  will  be  content  to  leave  the  matter  to  the  sound 
discretion  and  patriotism  of  the  magistrate  selected  to 
execute  the  laws. 

To   avoid  misconstruction,  I  desire  to  say  that  the 


36  EMANCIPATION. 

power  of  Congress  over  slavery  in  this  District  is  abso- 
lute ;  that  no  limitation  exists  in  the  letter  or  spirit  of 
the  Constitution  or  the  acts  of  cession.  All  that  is  re- 
quisite for  abolishing  slavery  here  is  just  compensation 
to  the  master.  Equally  absolute,  in  my  judgment,  is  the 
power  of  Congress  over  slavery  in  the  Territories. 

Mr.  Chairman,  in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  published  on  the 
first  day  of  the  last  year,  I  ventured  to  say  that  secession 
should  be  resisted  to  the  last  extremity,  by  force  of  arms ; 
that  it  cost  us  seven  years  of  war  to  secure  this  Govern- 
ment, and  that  seven  years,  if  need  be,  would  be 
wisely  spent  in  the  struggle  to  maintain  it;  that  for 
this  country  there  was  no  reasonable  hope  of  peace  but 
within  the  pale  of  the  Constitution,  and  in  obedience 
to  its  mandates.  The  progress  of  events  has  served 
only  to  deepen  those  convictions.  They  are  as  firmly 
rooted  as  my  trust  in  God  and  his  providence.  Who- 
ever else  may  falter,  I  must  stand  by  the  Constitution  I 
have  sworn  to  support.  I  am  not  wise  enough  to  build 
a  better.  I  am  not  rash  enough  to  experiment  upon  a 
nation's  life.  There  is,  to  me,  no  hope  of  "  one  country  " 
but  in  this  system  of  many  States  and  one  nation,  work- 
ing in  their  respective  spheres  as  if  the  Divine  Hand 
had  moulded  and  set  them  in  motion.  To  this  system 
the  integrity  of  the  States  is  as  essential  as  that  of  the 
central  power.  Their  life  is  one  life.  A  consolidated 
government  for  this  vast  country  would  be  essentially  a 
despotic  government,  democratic  in  name,  but  kept 
buoyant  by  corruption,  and  efficient  by  the  sword. 

Desiring  the  extinction  of  slavery  with  my  whole  mind 
and  heart,  I  watch  the  working  of  events  with  devout 


EMANCIPATION.  37 

gratitude  and  with  patience.  The  last  year  has  done  the 
work  of  a  generation.  By  no  rash  act  of  ours,  much 
less  any  radical  change  in  the  Constitution,  shall  we 
hasten  the  desired  result.  If,  in  the  pursuit  of  objects 
however  humane ;  if,  beguiled  by  the  flatteries  of  hope 
or  of  shallow  self-conceit;  if,  impelled  by  our  hatred 
of  treason,  and  desire  of  vengeance  or  retribution ;  if, 
seduced  by  the  "  insidious  wiles  of  foreign  influence," 
we  yield  to  such  change,  we  shall  destroy  the  best  hope 
of  freeman  and  slave,  and  the  best  hope  of  humanity 
this  side  the  grave. 


38 


CONFISCATION. 


MAY  24,  1862. 


The  House  having  under  consideration  the  bills  to  confiscate  the 
property,  and  free  from  servitude  the  slaves,  of  rebels,  Mr.  THOMAS 
said,  — 

Mr.  SPEAKER,  —  Before  proceeding  to  the  discussion 
of  the  measures  before  the  House,  I  hope  I  may  be 
pardoned  for  making  one  or  two  preliminary  sugges- 
tions. At  an  early  day,  I  expressed  my  earnest  convic- 
tion of  the  course  to  be  pursued  by  the  Government  and 
people  of  this  country  in  relation  to  secession ;  that  it 
was  but  another  and  an  unmanly  form  of  rebellion,  and 
that  it  must  be  met  at  the  threshold,  and  crushed  by 
arms ;  that  after  an  ordinance  of  secession,  as  before,  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  execute  in  every 
part  of  this  indivisible  Republic  the  Constitution  and 
the  laws. 

But  I  believed  then,  and  believe  now,  that  the  life  of 
the  States  is  just  as  essential  a  part  of  this  Union  as  the 
life  of  the  central  power ;  that  their  life  is  indeed  one 
life ;  and  when  the  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr. 
Sedgwick]  yesterday  assured  the  House  that  the  state- 
ment made  by  me  in  a  former  speech,  "  that,  when  the 
conflict  of  arms  ceases,  the  nation  will  remain,  and  the 


CONFISCATION.  39 

States  will  remain  essential  parts  of  the  body  politic," 
"was  one  of  those  bold  and  audacious  propositions 
which  cannot  fail  to  shock  the  common  sense  of  man- 
kind," I  felt  that  either  he  or  I  had  wholly  miscon- 
ceived the  nature  and  structure  of  the  Government 
under  which  we  live.  E  pluribus  unum ;  Of  many 
States,  one  nation.  The  Union  is  not  a  graveyard  for 
the  burial  of  dead  commonwealths.  The  body  politic  is 
safer  with  a  severed  limb  than  with  a  dead  one.  But 
the  gentleman  from  New  York  has  made  progress  in 
this  doctrine  of  State  suicide,  and  assures  the  House 
not  only  of  the  death  of  the  States,  but  that  the  people, 
"  by  permission  of  the  military  power,  and  not  before," 
can  form  new  governments,  and  seek  again  admission 
here.  Mark  the  words,  "  by  permission  of  the  military 
power,  and  not  before."  Where  are  we  drifting,  Mr. 
Speaker  ?  and  what  is  the  end  ?  These  are  not  hasty 
words,  but  the  deliberately  uttered  language  of  one,  who, 
no  less  by  culture  and  capacity  than  by  your  appoint- 
ment, is  a  leader  of  the  House.  "  By  permission  of  the 
military  power,  and  not  before."  I  repeat  the  question, 
Where  are  we  drifting  ?  What  is  the  end  \ 

I  was  guilty  of  another  audacious  act  in  the  view  of  the 
gentleman  from  New  York.  I  awoke  "  St.  Paul  from 
the  dead"  to  give  countenance  to  my  doctrine.  The 
gentleman  must  pardon  me,  Mr.  Speaker.  I  must  be  an 
old  fogy.  It  never  occurred  to  me  that  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  were  among  the  dead  things  of  the  past.  I  sup- 
posed they  were  the  well-springs  of  immortal  life,  and, 
like  the  Gospels,  the  same  to-day,  yesterday,  and  for 
ever.  I  am  bound  to  presume  this  was  a  heedless 


40  CONFISCATION. 

remark ;  for  I  am  sure  the  gentleman  can  have  no  sym- 
pathy with  the  new  school  of  philosophy  which  has 
outgrown  the  gospel,  and  which,  making  equal  war 
with  the  Christian  Church  and  with  the  Union,  has 
issued  the  new  evangel,  in  which  abstract  love  of  the 
race  is  substituted  for  practical  love  of  our  neighbor, 
confusion  for  social  order,  freedom  from  restraint  for 
the  liberty  of  obedience.  But  let  this  pass. 

Mr.  Speaker,  no  man  can  desire  more  earnestly  than 
I  do  the  suppression  of  this  Rebellion,  and  the  restora- 
tion of  order,  unity,  and  peace.  But  there  are  two 
things  I  cannot,  I  will  not  do.  I  will  not  trample  be- 
neath my  feet  the  Constitution  I  ha/e  sworn  before  God 
to  support.  I  will  not  violate,  even  against  these  rebels, 
the  law  of  nations  as  recognized  and  upheld  by  all 
civilized  and  Christian  States.  I  believe  I  must  do  both 
to  vote  for  these  bills,  and  at  the  same  time  do  an  act 
unwise,  and  especially  adapted  to  defeat  the  end  in 
view,  if  that  end  be  the  restoration  of  the  Union  and 
the  salvation  of  the  Republic. 

I  propose,  very  briefly,  to  examine  the  bills  before 
the  House  (and  especially  that  as  to  the  confiscation  of 
property),  under  the  law  of  nations  and  under  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  and  then  to  say  a  word 
upon  their  policy. 

The  positions  assumed  by  the  friends  of  these  mea- 
sures are,  that  we  may  deal  with  those  engaged  in  this 
Rebellion  as  public  enemies  and  as  traitors  ;  that,  re- 
garding them  as  enemies,  we  may  use  against  them  all 
the  powers  granted  by  the  law  of  nations,  and,  viewing 
them  as  rebels  or  traitors,  we  may  use  against  them  all 


CONFISCATION.  41 

the  powers  granted  by  the  Constitution  ;  and  that,  in 
either  view,  these  bills  can  be  sustained. 

Dealing  with  them  as  public  enemies,  it  is  said,  that, 
under  the  existing  law  of  nations,  we  have  a  clear  right 
to  confiscate  the  entire  private  property,  on  the  land  as 
well  as  the  sea,  real  and  personal,  of  those  in  arms,  and 
of  non-combatants  who  may  in  any  way  give  aid 
and  comfort  to  the  Rebellion.  This  first  bill  sweeps  over 
the  whole  ground.  I  deny  the  proposition,  Mr.  Speaker. 
In  the  name  of  that  public  law  whose  every  humane 
sentiment  it  violates ;  in  the  name  of  that  civilization 
whose  amenities  it  forgets  and  whose  progress  it  over- 
looks ;  in  the  name  of  human  nature  itself,  whose  better 
instincts  it  outrages,  I  deny  it.  Such  is  not  the  law  of 
nations. 

To  give  a  plausible  aspect  to  the  proposition,  the 
advocates  of  this  bill  have  gone  back  to  Grotius  and  to 
Bynkershoek  for  the  rules  of  war ;  and  even  then  have 
omitted  to  give  what  Grotius  calls  the  temperamenta,  or 
restraints  upon  the  rules.  You  might  as  well  attempt 
to  substitute  the  code  of  Moses  for  the  beatitudes  of  the 
gospel.  Any  thing  can  be  established  by  such  resort 
to  the  authorities.  By  the  older  writers,  you  can  prove 
not  only  all  the  property  of  the  vanquished  may  be 
taken,  but  that  every  prisoner  may  be  put  to  death.  By 
Grotius,  I  can  show  that  all  persons  taken  in  war  are 
slaves,  and  that  this  is  the  lot  even  of  all  found 
within  the  enemy's  boundaries  when  the  war  broke  out ; 
that  this  iron  rule  applies,  not  to  men  only,  but  to  their 
wives  and  children ;  nay,  further,  that  the  master  has 
over  the  slaves  the  power  of  life  and  death.  —  De  Jure 


42  CONFISCATION. 

Belli  et  Pads,  book  3,  chap.  7,  sects.  1,  2,  and  3.     I 
cite  a  short  passage  from  the  chapter  referred  to :  — 

"  The  effects  of  this  right  are  unlimited  ;  so  that  the  master  may  do 
any  thing  lawfully  to  the  slave,  as  Seneca  says.  There  is  no  suffer- 
in"  which  may  not  be  inflicted  on  such  slaves  with  impunity  ;  no  act 
which  may  not  in  any  manner  be  commanded  or  extorted :  so  that 
even  cruelty  in  the  masters  towards  persons  of  servile  condition  is 
unpunished,  except  so  far  as  the  civil  law  imposes  limits,  and  punish- 
ments for  cruelty.  In  all  nations  alike,  says  Caius,  we  may  see  that 
the  masters  have  the  power  of  life  and  death  over  slaves.  He  adds 
afterwards,  that,  by  the  Roman  law,  limits  were  set  to  this  power ; 
that  is,  on  Roman  ground.  So  Donatus  in  Terence  :  '  What  is  not 
lawful  from  a  master  to  a  slave  ? ' " 

By  Bynkershoek,  you  may  establish  that  the  con- 
queror has  over  the  vanquished  the  power  of  life  and 
death,  and  the  power  of  selling  them  into  slavery ;  that 
every  thing  is  lawful  in  war, —  the  use  of  poison  and  the 
destruction  of  the  unarmed  and  defenceless.  —  Law  of 
War,  Duponceau's  translation,  pp.  2,  18,  19,  20. 

But  what  then,  Mr.  Speaker1?  Does  any  man  sup- 
pose that  these  writers  give  us  the  laws  of  war,  as 
upheld,  sanctioned,  and  used  by  the  Christian  and  civil- 
ized States  of  to-day "?  Nothing  would  be  further  from 
the  fact.  Commerce,  civilization,  Christian  culture,  have 
tempered  and  softened  the  rigor  of  the  ancient  rules ; 
and  the  State  which  should  to-day  assume  to  put  them 
in  practice  would  be  an  outcast  from  the  society  of  na- 
tions. Nay,  more :  they  would  combine,  and  rightfully 
combine,  to  stay  its  hand.  For  the  modern  law  of  war, 
you  must  look  to  the  usages  of  civilized  States,  and  to 
the  publicists  who  have  explained  and  enforced  them. 
Those  usages  constitute  themselves  the  laws  of  war. 


CONFISCATION.  43 

In  relation  to  the  capture  and  confiscation  of  private 
property  on  the  land,  I  venture  to  say  with  great  confi- 
dence, and  after  careful  examination,  that  the  result  of 
the  whole  matter  has  never  been  better  stated  than  by 
our  own  great  publicist,  Mr.  Wheaton :  — 

"  But  by  the  modern  usage  of  nations,  which  has  now  acquired 
the  force  of  law,  temples  of  religion,  public  edifices  devoted  to  civil 
purposes  only,  monuments  of  art,  and  repositories  of  science,  are  ex- 
empted from  the  general  operations  of  war.  Private  property  on  land 
is  also  exempt  from  confiscation,  with  the  exception  of  such  as  may 
become  booty  in  special  cases,  when  taken  from  enemies  in  the  field 
or  in  besieged  towng,  and  of  military  contributions  levied  upon  the 
inhabitants  of  the  hostile  territory.  This  exemption  extends  even  to 
the  case  of  an  absolute  and  unqualified  conquest  of  the  enemy's 
country." — Elements  of  International  Law,  p.  421. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  no  careful  student  of 
international  law  will  deny  that  this  passage  from  Mr. 
Wheaton  fairly  expresses  the  modern  usage  and  law 
upon  the  subject ;  but  you  will  permit  me  to  refer  for  a 
moment  to  the  doctrine  stated  by  my  illustrious  prede- 
cessor, whose  name  has  been  so  often  invoked  in  this 
debate,  John  Quincy  Adams.  "  Our  object,"  he  says  in 
a  letter  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  "  is  the  restoration  of 
all  the  property,  including  slaves,  which,  by  the  usages 
of  war  among  civilized  nations,  ought  not  to  have  been 
taken."  "All  private  property  on  shore  was  of  that 
description.  It  was  entitled  by  the  laws  of  war  to  ex- 
emption from  capture."  — Mr.  Adams  to  the  Secretary 
of  State,  Aug.  22,  1815. 

Again,  he  says,  in  a  letter  to  Lord  Castlereagh,  Feb. 
17,  1816,— 

"  But  as,  by  the  same  usages  of  civilized  nations,  private  property 
is  not  the  subject  of  lawful  capture  in  war  upon  the  land,  it  is  perfectly 


44  CONFISCATION. 

clear,  that,  in  every  stipulation,  private  property  shall  be  respected  ; 
or  that,  upon  the  restoration  of  places  during  the  war,  it  shall  not  be 
carried  away."  —  4  American  State  Papers,  pp.  116,  117,  122,  123. 

A  volume  might  be  filled  with  like  citations  from 
modern  writers.  I  will  content  myself  with  perhaps 
the  latest  expression,  and  from  a  great  statesman,  a 
native  of  Massachusetts,  and  of  my  own  county  of 
Worcester :  — 

"The  prevalence  of  Christianity  and  the  progress  of  civili- 
zation have  greatly  mitigated  the  severity  of  the  ancient  mode  of 
prosecuting  hostilities.  .  .  .  It  is  a  generally  received  rule  of 
modern  warfare,  —  so  far,  at  least,  as  operations  upon  land  are 
concerned,  —  that  the  persons  and  effects  of  non-combatants  are  to  be 
respected.  The  wanton  pillage  or  uncompensated  appropriation  of 
individual  property  by  an  army,  even  in  possession  of  an  enemy's 
country,  is  against  the  usage  of  modern  times.  Such  a  proceeding  at 
this  day  would  be  condemned  by  the  enlightened  judgment  of  the 
world,  unless  warranted  by  particular  circumstances.  Every  conside- 
ration which  upholds  this  conduct  in  regard  to  a  war  on  land  favors 
the  application  of  the  same  rule  to  the  persons  and  property  of  citi- 
zens of  the  belligerents  found  upon  the  ocean."  —  Mr.  Marcy  to  the 
Count  de  Sartiges,  July  28,  1856. 

Such  I  believe  to  be  the  settled  law  and  usage  of  na- 
tions. A  careful  examination  of  the  arguments  made 
on  this  subject  has  served  but  to  strengthen  and  deepen 
this  conviction. 

I  do  not  forget,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  case  of  Brown 
vs.  The  United  States  (8  Cranch,  110)  has  been  often 
referred  to  in  this  debate  as  affirming  the  contrary  rule. 
The  points  decided  in  that  case  I  have  before  stated  to 
the  House.  The  points,  the  only  points,  decided  were, 
that  British  property  found  in  the  United  States  on  land 
at  the  commencement  of  hostilities  (war  of  1812)  could 


CONFISCATION.  45 

not  be  condemned  as  enemy's  property,  without  an  act 
of  Congress  for  that  purpose  ;  and  that  the  declaration 
of  war  was  not  sufficient.  Gentlemen  have  referred  to 
the  obiter  dicta,  the  discussions  of  the  judges,  as  the 
decision  of  the  court.  The  distinction  is  familiar  and 
vital,  but  has  been  lost  sight  of  in  this  debate.  Only 
the  points  necessarily  involved  in  the  result  constitute 
the  decision.  Let  me  illustrate  the  matter  by  a  familiar 
case,  —  that  of  Dred  Scott.  It  is  the  matter  outside  of 
the  decision,  what  a  distinguished  jurist  has  called  the 
"  slopping-over"  of  the  court,  that  was  so  fruitful  in  mis- 
chief. The  point  decided  by  the  majority  of  the  court 
was,  that  Dred  Scott  was  not  a  citizen  of  Missouri,  so 
as  to  be  able  to  maintain  an  action  in  the  courts  of  the 
United  States,  upon  the  grounds  of  such  citizenship. 
Under  the  conflicting  decisions  in  the  courts  of  Mis- 
souri, I  have  always  thought  that  case  might  have  been 
decided  either  way,  without  attracting  public  attention 
or  animadversion.  All  that  was  said  outside  of  that 
point  has  no  more  legal  force  than  the  paper  on  which 
it  was  written.  Use  the  sayings  of  the  judges  in  that 
case,  as  they  have  used  those  in  Brown  vs.  The  United 
States,  and  you  can  establish  the  rightful  existence  of 
slavery  in  the  Territories,  the  invalidity  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise,  and  God ,  only  knows  how  many  other 
errors  in  history  and  law.  Treat  what  is  said  by  the 
majority  of  the  court  outside  of  the  point  decided  as 
argument, —  and  it  is  nothing  more, —  and  slavery  in  the 
Territories  is  without  any  legal  prop  or  support.  And 
I  may  say,  in  passing,  Mr.  Speaker,  there  never  was,  in 
my  judgment,  a  plausible  argument  even  to  establish  the 


46  CONFISCATION. 

power  and  right  of  the  master  to  take  his  slave  into 
the  Territories,  and  hold  him  in  servitude.  Slavery 
exists  by  local  law  and  usage  only.  It  has  no  extra  ter- 
ritorial power.  The  moment  the  slave,  with  the  consent 
of  the  master,  is  taken  beyond  the  line  of  the  place 
where  the  law  tolerates  its  existence,  the  chains  fall 
from  his  limbs.  Property  in  the  slave  there  may  be  by 
local  municipal  law,  but  not  by  the  law  of  nature  and 
of  nations ;  not  by  that  universal,  immutable  law  of 
which  Cicero  speaks  so  divinely  in  the  "  Republic."  May 
I  give  the  Latin,  Mr.  Speaker?  Nee  erit  alia  lex  Ro- 
mce,  alia  Athenis,  alia  nunc,  alia  posthac;  sed  et  omnes 
gentes  et  omni  tempore  una  lex  et  sempiterna  et  immuta- 
bilis  continebit.  Nobler  thought  in  nobler  words  never 
fell  from  human  lips  or  pen. 

But  I  return  from  this  digression  to  say,  Mr.  Speaker, 
that  the  distinction  sought  to  be  established  by  the  pas- 
sages cited  from  the  discussions  in  the  case  of  Brown 
vs.  The  United  States,  between  the  law  of  war  and  the 
mitigations  of  that  law  which  the  usages  of  modern 
nations  have  introduced,  has  no  foundation  in  principle. 
It  is  in  the  usages  of  civilized  and  Christian  nations 
that  we  are  to  seek  the  law  of  nations.  As  the  law 
merchant  has  grown  up  from  the  usages  of  trade  and 
commerce,  so  has  the  modern  Jaw  of  nations  grown  up 
from  the  usages  of  enlightened  States.  The  ancient 
barbarous  rules  of  war  have  been  tempered  and  softened 
by  commerce,  by  the  arts,  by  diffused  culture,  and,  more 
than  all,  by  the  spirit  of  the  gospel ;  and  all  Christian 
States  recognize  with  joy  and  with  obedience  the  milder 
law.  In  the  jurisprudence  of  nations,  as  in  our  own, 


CONFISCATION.  47 

• 

there  is  one  law  felt  above  all  others,  —  the  law  of  pro- 
gress. Apparently  at  rest,  it  is  ever  silently  moving 
onward,  quickened,  purified,  and  illumined  by  the  in- 
spiration of  that  higher  law,  "  whose  seat  is  the  bosom 
of  God,  and  its  voice  the  harmony  of  the  world."  The 
great,  prophetic  thought  of  Pascal  may  yet  be  realized : 
Deux  lois  suffisent  pour  regler  la  republique  chreti- 
enne,  mieux  que  toutes  les  lois  politiques,  —  I  amour  de 
Dieu,  et  celui  du  prochain. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  can  more  fitly  conclude  what  I 
can  say,  in  the  brief  time  allotted  to  me,  on  the  capture 
and  confiscation  of  the  private  property  of  rebels, 
viewed  in  the  light  of  international  law,  than  in  the 
words  of  John  Marshall,  near  the  close  of  his  judicial 
life :  — 

"  It  may  not  be  unworthy  of  remark,  that  it  is  very  unusual,  even 
in  cases  of  conquest,  for  the  conqueror  to  do  more  than  to  displace 
the  sovereign,  and  assume  dominion  over  the  country.  The  modern 
usage  of  nations,  which  has  become  law,"  — 

mark  the  words,  Mr.  Speaker,  —  "  the  modern  usage  of 
nations,  which  has  become  law," — 

—  "  would  be  violated  ;  that  sense  of  justice  and  of  right,  which  is  ac- 
knowledged and  felt  by  the  whole  civilized  world,  would  be  outraged, — 
if  private  property  should  be  generally  confiscated,  and  private  rights 
annulled.  The  people  change  their  allegiance  ;  their  relation  to  their 
ancient  sovereign  is  dissolved  :  but  their  relations  to  each  other,  and 
their  rights  of  property,  remain  undisturbed.  If  this  be  the  modern 
rule,  even  in  cases  of  conquest,  who  can  doubt  its  application  to  the 
case  of  an  amicable  cession  of  territory  ?  "  —  United  States  vs.  Per- 
cheman,  7  Peters,  51. 

It  is  against  the  light  of  these  considerations  and 
authorities,  and  against  the  prevailing  law  and  judg- 


48  CONFISCATION. 

• 

ment  of  the  Christian  world,  that  it  has  been  so  often 
confidently,  I  will  not  say  flippantly,  asserted  on  this 
floor,  that  there  could  be  no  doubt  of  our  power,  under 
the  law  of  nations,  to  seize  and  confiscate  the  entire 
property  of  the  rebels  as  public  enemies. 

I  pass  to  the  second  branch  of  the  subject,  our 
power,  under  the  Constitution,  to  pass  these  bills.  It 
has  been  often  said  in  the  course  of  this  debate,  and  in 
terms  without  qualification,  that  the  rebels  hold  to  us 
the  twofold  relation  of  enemies  and  traitors,  and  that 
we  may  use  against  them  all  the  appliances  of  war  and 
all  the  penalties  of  municipal  law.  To  a  certain  limit- 
ed extent,  the  proposition  is  sound.  Treason  consists 
hi  levying  war  against  the  United  States.  The  act 
of  treason  is  an  act  of  war,  and  you  use  the  powers  of 
war  to  meet  and  subdue  traitors  in  arms  against  the 
Government. 

It  is  also  true,  that,  in  the  relations  between  the  Gov- 
ernment and  its  subjects,  the  rightful  power  of  punish- 
ment does  not  necessarily  cease  with  the  war ;  but  is  it 
also  true,  that  you  can  exercise  both  powers  at  the  same 
time  I  And  is  not  here  the  utter  fallacy  of  this  whole 
argument  1  Take  an  example.  You  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  exchange  flags  of  truce  ;  you  have  recognized, 
to  a  certain  extent,  belligerent  powers.  An  officer  of 
the  rebel  army  comes  to  you  under  a  flag  of  truce  :  can 
you  take  him  from  under  that  flag,  and  hang  him  for 
treason "?  He  stands  to  you  in  the  double  relation  of 
enemy  and  traitor ;  but  you  cannot  touch  a  hair  of  his 
head  while  he  is  under  that  white  flag.  Take  another 
case.  You  have  stipulated  for  an  exchange  of  prisoners 


CONFISCATION.  49 

of  war.  The  cartel  has  been  sent,  and  the  prisoner  of 
war  is  on  his  way  to  make  the  exchange.  Does  any 
man  on  this  floor  say  that  you  can  take  him  on  his  way, 
and  try  and  hang  him  1  And  if  not,  why  not  1  The 
plain  answer  is,  Because,  having  recognized  him  as  under 
the  law  of  nations,  while  he  is  subject  to  its  power,  he 
is  entitled  to  its  protection. 

Pass  what  bills  we  may,  Mr.  Speaker,  when  the  war 
is  ended,  these  questions  will  come  up  to  be  settled.  I 
hope  I  may  be  pardoned  for  saying,  with  great  respect, 
to  my  friends  on  all  sides  of  the  House,  that  they  will 
be  as  difficult  questions  as  statesmen  or  jurists  were  ever 
called  upon  to  decide ;  and  that  it  is  wise  to  reserve,  as 
far  as  possible,  our  judgment.  No  thoughtful  man  will 
content  himself  with  the  declaration,  that  belligerent 
"  rebels  have  no  rights."  Passion  may  say  that ;  reason, 
never.  Passion,  sooner  or  later,  subsides,  and  reason 
re-ascends  the  judgment-seat ;  and  these  questions  must 
be  answered  there,  and  to  that  august  tribunal  before 
which  the  conduct  of  men  and  nations  passes  in  view,  — 
the  enlightened  opinion  of  the  Christian  world.  Such 
questions  are,  how  far,  flagrante  bello  (while  war  was 
raging),  with  respect  to  prisoners  of  war,  the  civil 
power  was  restrained ;  how  far  the  treating  with  rebels, 
and  exchanging  them  as  prisoners  of  war,  may  affect 
their  punishment  as  traitors,  either  in  person  or  pro- 
perty. I  express  no  opinion,  except  to  say  they  must  be 
calmly  met  and  answered. 

But  assuming,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that 
during  the  war  even,  and  while  recognizing  their  belli- 
gerent rights,  you  may  visit  upon  the  rebels  the  full  force 

7 


50  CONFISCATION. 

and  weight  of  the  municipal  law,  I  proceed  to  inquire 
whether  the  mode  proposed  by  these  bills  is  in  confor- 
mity to  the  organic  and  supreme  law,  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States.  I  am  not  to  be  deterred  from  the 
discussion  by  any  suggestions  from  weak  or  wicked 
men  —  none  other  can  make  them  —  of  leniency  to 
rebels,  and  compassion  for  traitors.  There  is  but  little 
elevation  in  contempt ;  but  such  suggestions  do  not  rise 
high  enough  to  meet  it.  They  pass  by  me  as  the  idle 
wind.  If  a  man  has  no  other  arrows  in  his  quiver,  let 
him  use  these:  I  am  content. 

The  favorite  argument,  Mr.  Speaker,  of  those  who 
claim  for  Congress  the  power  to  confiscate  the  property 
of  traitors  without  trial  by  jury  is,  that  the  want  of  this 
power  would  show  a  fatal  weakness  in  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  a  lack  of  wisdom  and  foresight  in  its  framers. 
They  will  not  believe  the  Constitution  is  so  weak  and 
helpless,  so  incapable  of  self-defence.  Nothing,  in  my 
judgment,  so  shows  its  majesty  and  strength  ;  pray  God, 
immortal  strength.  The  powers  of  war  are  almost  infi- 
nite. The  resources  of  this  vast  country  spring  to 
your  open  hand.  All  that  men  have,  even  their  lives, 
are  at  the  service  of  their  country  ;  and  in  this  great 
conflict  how  nobly  and  freely  given !  You  can  raise  an 
army  of  seven  hundred  thousand  men ;  you  can  give 
them  all  the  best  appliances  of  war;  you  can  cover 
your  bays  and  rivers  and  seas  with  your  navy ;  you  can 
blockade  a  coast  of  three  thousand  miles ;  you  may  cut 
down  the  last  rebel  on  the  field  of  battle.  Such  is  the 
power  of  war.  But,  Mr.  Speaker,  when  you  shall  have 
used  all  these  powers,  when  peace  shall  have  been 


CONFISCATION.  51 

restored,  or  when  the  rebels  shall  come  and  lay  them- 
selves at  your  feet  or  be  taken  captive  by  your  arms,  then 
also  will  the  power  of  that  Constitution  be  made  mani- 
fest ;  then  also  will  this  Government  be  shown  to  be  the 
most  powerful  and  the  noblest  on  the  earth,  not  because 
the  captured  rebel  is  at  your  mercy,  but  because  he  is 
not;  because,  under  the  shield  of  the  Constitution,  the 
rebel  at  your  feet  is  stronger  than  armies,  stronger  than 
navies.  You  cannot  touch  a  hair  of  his  head,  or  take 
from  him  a  dollar  of  his  property,  until  you  shall  have 
tried  and  condemned  him  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers 
and  by  the  law  of  the  land.  Does  this  show  the 
weakness  of  the  Constitution,  or  does  it  show  its  tran- 
scendent strength?  Are  these  written  constitutions 
established  to  give  to  Government  power  without  limit 
over  the  property,  liberty,  and  life  of  the  citizen  1  or  are 
they  made  to  define  and  limit  the  power  of  the  Govern- 
ment, and  to  shield  and  protect  the  rights  of  the 
subject  \ 

I  have  always  been  taught  that  the  people  is  the 
sovereign  ;  that  these  constitutions  are  carefully  defined 
grants  from  the  sovereign  power,  so  framed  as  to  esta- 
blish justice,  and  at  the  same  time  secure  the  blessings  of 
liberty  and  the  protection  of  law  even  to  the  humblest 
and  meanest  citizen.  I  know,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  these 
are  getting  to  be  old-fashioned  sentiments.  Magna  Carta 
is  soiled  and  worm-eaten.  The  Bill  of  Rights,  the 
muniments  of  personal  freedom,  habeas  corpus,  trial 
by  jury,  —  what  are  they  all  worth  in  comparison  with 
this  new  safeguard  of  liberty,  "  the  proceeding  in  rem"  ? 

Were  you   ever   at   Runnymede,   Mr.    Speaker?     I 


52  CONFISCATION. 

remember  going  down,  on  a  beautiful  day  in  July,  from 
Windsor  Castle  to  the  plain,  and  crossing  the  narrow 
channel  of  the  Thames  to  that  little  island,  on  which, 
more  than  six  centuries  ago,  in  the  early  gray  of  morn- 
ing, those  sturdy  barons  wrested  from  an  unwilling  king 
the  first  great  charter  of  English  freedom,  the  germ  of 
life  of  the  civil  liberty  we  "have  to-day.  I  could  hardly 
have  been  more  moved,  had  I  stood  in  the  village  and  by 
the  manger  in  which  was  cradled  "  the  son  of  Mary  and 
the  Son  of  God."  From  the  gray  of  that  morning 
streamed  the  rays,  which,  uplifting  with  the  hours,  cours- 
ing with  the  years,  and  keeping  peace  with  the  centu- 
ries, have  encircled  the  whole  earth  with  the  glorious 
light  of  English  liberty,  the  liberty  for  which  our 
fathers  planted  these  commonwealths  in  the  wilderness  ; 
for  which  they  went  through  the  baptism  of  fire  and 
blood  in  the  Revolution ;  which  they  embedded  and 
hoped  to  make  immortal  in  the  Constitution ;  without 
which  the  Constitution  would  not  be  worth  the  parch- 
ment on  which  it  was  written. 

But  I  must  not  linger  by  the  way,  Mr.  Speaker. 
What  do  these  bills  propose  1  The  immediate  object  is 
to  confiscate  the  property  of  the  rebels.  For  what  end  ? 
For  punishment,  is  it  not  ?  If  you  strip  these  men  of 
their  property,  it  is  not  because  they  are  innocent; 
although  this  bill  does,  in  fact,  confiscate  the  property 
of  persons  who  may  be  guiltless  of  any  offence :  but 
the  theory  of  the  bill  is  to  punish  men  for  the  crime  of 
rebellion,  or  treason,  or  give  it  what  name  you  will. 
The  bill,  indeed,  recites,  as  an  ulterior  purpose,  the 
payment  of  the  expenses  of  the  Rebellion.  But  there  is 


CONFISCATION.  53 

no  man  on  this  floor  so  verdant  as  to  suppose  this  means 
much.  If  the  courts  enforce  the  statute  (I  believe  they 
will  not),  how  much  treasure  can  you  wring  from  those 
States,  poor  at  the  best,  but  whom  the  close  of  this  war 
will  leave  impoverished,  seared,  and  swept  as  by  fire  ? 
You  might  as  well  pasture  your  cattle  on  the  Desert  of 
Sahara.  The  land  will  indeed  be  left ;  but  who  will  be 
your  purchasers,  when  they  know  they  musMake  at  the 
best  a  doubtful  title,  but  a  sure,  bitter,  and  lasting  feud? 
The  strife  and  hate  growing  out  of  the  confiscations  of 
the  Revolution  are  scarcely  yet  appeased ;  and  it  was 
with  these  confiscations  fresh  in  the  memories  of  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution  that  the  limitation  of  the 
power  of  forfeiture  was  adopted.  There  never  was  a 
wilder  dream  than  that  of  paying  the  expenses  of  the 
Rebellion  with  the  fruits  of  confiscation. 

The  real  object  of  the  bill  is  punishment ;  the  punish- 
ment of  an  offence  clearly  defined  in  the  Constitution, 
of  the  highest  offence  known  to  the  laws.  The  punish- 
ment is  the  forfeiture  of  the  property  of  the  offender. 
The  forfeiture  is  to  be  established  before  judicial  tribu- 
nals, and  upon  proof  of  the  guilt  of  the  owner.  You 
have,  then,  these  three  elements;  punishment  —  upon 
proof  of  the  commission  of  crime  —  before  a  judicial 
tribunal.  One  element  is  wanting  ;  one  has  been  dili- 
gently excluded,  — trial  by  jury.  Human  ingenuity  has 
been  exhausted  to  shut  the  door  against  it ;  and  your 
bill  is  like  Hamlet  with  the  Prince  of  Denmark  omit- 
ted by  particular  request.  Here  is  the  plain,  impera- 
tive mandate  of  the  Constitution,  which  he  who  runs 
may  read :  — 


54  CONFISCATION. 

"  The  trial  of  all  crimes,  except  in  cases  of  impeachment,  shall  be 
by  jury."  -r-  Const.,  art.  3,  sect.  2. 

The  property  to  which  the  bill  applies  is  not,  under 
the  laws  of  nations,  prize;  it  is  not  booty;  it  is  not 
contraband  of  war ;  it  is  not  enforced  military  contri- 
bution; it  is  not  property  used  or  employed  in  the 
war  or  in  resistance  to  the"  laws,  and  therefore  clearly 
to  be  distinguished  from  that  covered  by  the  statute  of 
Aug.  6,  1861.  It  is  private  property  outside  of  the 
conflict  of  arms ;  forfeited,  not  because  it  is  the  instru- 
ment of  offence,  but  as  a  penalty  for  the  crime  of  the 
owner.  The  disguise  of  the  proceeding  in  rem  is  too 
thin  and  transparent.  No  lawyer,  no  man  of  common 
sense,  will  be  deceived  by  it.  The  proceeding,  in  spirit, 
in  substance,  and  in  effect,  is  the  punishment  of  treason 
by  the  forfeiture  of  a  man's  entire  estate,  real  and  per- 
sonal, without  trial  by  jury,  and  in  utter  disregard 
of  the  provision  of  the  Constitution,  which  limits  the 
forfeiture  for  treason  to  the  life  of  the  person  attainted 
(art.  3,  sect.  3). 

Was  there  ever  a  balder  contrivance  to  get  around 
the  plainest  and  most  sacred  provisions  of  the  Consti- 
tution than  this  attempt  to  get  a  man's  farm,  his  cattle 
and  fodder,  his  plough,  spade,  and  hoe,  into  a  maritime 
court,  and  try  them  by  the  law  of  prize?  With  all 
respect  for  my  excellent  friends  upon  the  committee, 
such  a  proposition  "  shocks  our  common  sense  "  as  well 
as  our  sense  of  justice  and  right.  You  make  the  plea 
of  necessity,  and  necessity  is  the  mother  of  invention ; 
but  do  you  expect  to  satisfy  sensible  men,  when  reason 
resumes  its  sway,  that  under  a  Constitution  which  de- 


CONFISCATION.  55 

fines  treason  to  consist  in  levying  war  against  the  United 
States,  which  will  not  suffer  the  traitor  to  be  condemned 
except  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers,  £nd,  when  con- 
demned, will  not  forfeit  his  estate  except  during  his 
life,  you  can,  by  this  proceeding  in  rem,  without  indict- 
ment, without  trial  by  jury,  without  the  proof  of  two 
witnesses  (art.  3,  sect.  3),  for  treason,  for  the  act  of 
levying  war,  deprive  him  of  all  his  estate,  real  and  per- 
sonal, for  life  and  in  fee  1  Nay,  more  ;  and  that,  after 
he  has  thus  been  punished,  without  trial  by  jury,  and 
by  the  loss  of  his  whole  estate,  you  can,  for  the  same 
act  of  levying  war,  try  him  and  hang  him?  To  sug- 
gest a  doubt,  whether,  after  all,  this  is  plain  sailing 
under  the  flag  of  the  Constitution,  is  to  have  too  nice 
constitutional  scruples  ! 

I  have  touched  but  upon  one  or  two  legal  objec- 
tions to  these  bills.  Their  name  is  Legion ;  but  I  must 
hasten  to  a  more  minute  examination  of  the  bills 
themselves.  I  do  not  wish  to  say  the  bills  are  hastily 
drawn.  If  right  in  principle,  defects  of  form,  or  want 
of  detail,  can  be  supplied.  In  attempting,  however, 
legislation  involving  a  new  principle,  or  a  new  applica- 
tion of  a  principle,  it  is  a  pretty  good  test  to  let  it  be 
run  through  the  machinery  of  a  carefully  drawn  statute, 
and  see  how  it  works.  I  should  have  liked  to  have 
seen  that  test  applied  here. 

Looking  now  to  the  general  features  of  the  confis- 
cation bill,  I  desire  the  House  to  observe  that  the  bill, 
though  not  in  form,  is,  in  substance  and  effect,  retro- 
active. It  takes  effect  from  its  passage.  It  applies  to 
all  acts  committed  after  its  passage.  As  there  are  whole 


56  CONFISCATION. 

districts,  States  even,  where  the  law  cannot  be  promul- 
gated, and  who  will  remain  in  ignorance  of  its  pas- 
sage, the  law,  as  to  them,  will  be  ex  post  facto.  They 
will  neither  know,  nor  have  the  means  of  knowing,  of 
the  existence  of  the  penalty  when  the  act  is  commit- 
ted. Will  you  say  it  is  their  own  fault?  I  beg  you 
to  consider,  that  since  your  protection  has  been  lost, 
and  until  it  is  restored,  there  has  been  and  can  be  no 
really  free  choice  with  the  individual  citizen  whom  he 
shall  obey.  What  measure  of  punishment  would  you 
mete  to  a  citizen  of  Jacksonville,  who,  after  the  with- 
drawal of  your  army,  should  yield  to  "  the  powers  that 
be,"  though  certainly  not  "  ordained  of  God  "  ? 

I  ask  the  attention  of  the  House,  and  a  just  and 
humane  people,  if  these  words  shall  ever  reach  them, 
to  the  wide  sweep  of  this  bill.  You  would  infer  from 
the  arguments  of  its  friends,  that  the  bill  was  to  reach 
only  the  leaders  and  instigators  of  rebellion.  How,  if 
that  were  so,  the  limitation  and  the  payment  of  the 
expenses  of  rebellion  from  confiscation  would  hang 
together,  has  not  been  explained.  But  the  fact  is  far 
otherwise. 

The  first  section  includes  several  classes ;  and,  first, 
all  officers  of  the  rebel  army  or  navy,  non-commis- 
sioned as  well  as  commissioned.  Officers  of  high  rank 
should  be  included ;  but  there  is  no  sound  reason  what- 
ever for  going  down  to  sergeants  and  corporals.  The 
second,  third,  and  fourth  classes  embrace  persons  who 
shall  hold  certain  offices  in  the  Confederate  States,  or 
any  of  them,  including  judges  of  the  State  Courts,  and 
members  of  State  Legislatures  and  conventions.  In  all 


« 

CONFISCATION.  57 

these  cases,  the  mere  holding  of  the  office  is  made  the 
ground  of  confiscation,  without  regard  to  the  manner  in 
which  the  duties  shall  be  discharged,  or  to  whether 
those  duties  involve  any  active  service  against  the 
National  Government ;  men,  it  may  be,  whom  the  Re- 
bellion found  in  office,  and  who  continue  in  the  regular 
exercise  of  their  functions.  Here,  for  example,  is  the 
judge  of  probate  or  surrogate  of  a  county.  Rebellion 
breaks  out :  men  will  die,  and  estates  must  be  settled, 
and  care  had  of  widows  and  orphans.  To  visit  this  man 
with  the  confiscation  of  his  estate,  for  continuing  quietly 
to  discharge  his  duties,  is  equally  harsh  and  absurd. 

The  same  remark  applies,  possibly  with  increased 
force,  to  persons  embraced  in  the  fifth  class ;  those 
holding  any  office  or  agency  under  any  of  the  States  of 
the  Confederacy,  or  any  of  the  laws  thereof,  whether 
such  office  or  agency  be  State  or  municipal  in  its  name 
or  character.  Every  justice  of  the  peace,  notary  public, 
or  town-clerk,  treasurer,  assessor,  constable,  overseer  of 
the  poor,  undertaker  even,  must  resign  his  functions, 
or  become  a  pauper.  The  result,  if  successful,  is  a 
suspension  of  civil  order ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
severest  punishment  for  a  venial  offence,  if  it  be  an 
offence. 

The  second  section  includes  all  persons  who,  being 
engaged  in  rebellion,  or  aiding  and  abetting  it,  shall 
not,  within  sixty  days  after  proclamation  from  the  Presi- 
dent, desist,  and  return  to  their  allegiance.  Sixty  days 
seems  to  be  a  reasonable  notice ;  but,  if  the  parties  are 
in  such  condition  that  the  notice  cannot  reach  them, 
then  it  is  not  notice.  What  may  be  fairly  and  justly 

8 


58  CONFISCATION. 

required  is,  that  men  shall  return  to  their  allegiance 
the  moment  they  have  reasonable  assurance  of  perma- 
nent protection  from  the  National  Government.  It  is 
idle  to  look  for  it  before  such  protection  is  possible. 
To  ask  a  man  in  the  interior  of  a  cotton  State  to  abjure 
the  rebel  Government  and  return  to  his  allegiance,  in 
the  present  condition  of  things,  is  to  ask  a  moral  impos- 
sibility. To  confiscate  his  property  for  not  doing  so,  is 
itself  a  crime. 

A  word  upon  another  harsh  feature  of  the  bill. 
With  respect  to  every  person  within  its  scope,  and  with- 
out the  least  discrimination  as  to  degrees  of  guilt,  a 
clean  sweep  of  property  is  made.  There  is  no  exemp- 
tion of  necessary  household  furniture,  or  of  provisions, 
or  of  tools  of  trade.  Nothing  is  spared ;  the  bed  on 
which  the  wife  sleeps,  the  cradle  of  the  child,  the  pork, 
or  flour-barrel.  Taken  in  connection  with  the  fact,  that 
the  bill  declares  that  the  President  shall  cause  the 
seizure  to  be  made,  and  not  merely  that  he  may  ;  that 
provision  is  made  for  the  sale  of  perishable  property,  and 
that  none  is  made  for  the  remission,  in  whole  or  part, 
of  the  forfeiture;  and  we  cannot  fail  to  understand 
the  spirit  in  which  the  bill  is  conceived,  or  the  impres- 
sion it  will  not  fail  to  make  on  the  friends  of  this 
country  abroad,  who  cannot  fully  appreciate  the  bitter- 
ness which  civil  conflict  engenders ;  or,  if  they  do,  will 
not  pardon  statesmen  for  yielding  to  its  influence.  It  is 
plain  that  the  angel  of  mercy  never  found  his  way  to 
the  committee-room  ;  or,  if  he  went  in  with  my  friend 
from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Mallory]  or  my  friend  from  New 
Jersey  [Mr.  Cobb],  he  was  politely  bowed  out,  with  the 


CONFISCATION.  59 

assurance  that  neither  rebels,  nor  those  dependent  upon 
them,  had  any  rights. 

I  ought,  however,  to  add,  Mr.  Speaker,  that,  looking 
upon  seizure  and  confiscation  as  a  penalty  for  crime, 
treason,  or  rebellion,  the  President,  under  his  general 
power  of  pardon,  might  remit  the  punishment.  But 
then  the  other  conclusion  will  follow,  that,  without  trial 
by  jury,  no  valid  forfeiture  can  be  effected. 

The  second  bill,  for  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves 
of  rebels,  is  much  broader  in  its  scope,  including  every 
person  who  shall  engage  in  rebellion,  or  aid  and  abet 
it.  The  insertion  of  the  word  "  wilfully,"  lawyers  will 
see,  does  not  affect  the  legal  construction.  There  are 
considerations  of  humanity  in  favor  of  this  bill,  which 
do  not  apply  to  the  first ;  but  it  is  not  restricted  to  slaves 
used  in  the  Rebellion,  and  no  form  of  judicial  proceed- 
ing is  provided.  The  constitutional  objections  apply  to 
it  with  at  least  equal  force. 

That  the  bills  before  the  House  are  in  violation  of 
the  law  of  nations  and  of  the  Constitution,  I  cannot  — 
I  say  it  with  all  deference  to  others  —  I  cannot  enter- 
tain a  doubt.  My  path  of  duty  is  plain.  The  duty  of 
obedience  to  that  Constitution  was  never  more  impera- 
tive than  now.  I  am  not  disposed  to  deny,  that  I  have 
for  it  a  superstitious  reverence.  I  have  "  worshipped 
it  from  my  forefathers."  In  the  school  of  rigid  disci- 
pline by  which  we  were  prepared  for  it ;  in  the  strug- 
gles out  of  which  it  was  born ;  the  seven  years  of  bitter 
conflict,  and  the  seven  darker  years  in  which  that  con- 
flict seemed  to  be  fruitless  of  good ;  in  the  wisdom  with 
which  it  was  constructed  and  first  administered  and  set 


60  CONFISCATION. 

in  motion  ;  in  the  beneficent  Government  it  has  secured 
for  more  than  two  generations ;  in  the  blessed  influences 
it  has  exerted  upon  the  cause  of  freedom  and  humanity 
the  world  over,  I  cannot  fail  to  recognize  the  hand  of 
a  guiding  and  loving  Providence.  But  not  for  the 
blessed  memories  of  the  past  only  do  I  cling  to  it.  He 
must  be  blinded  with  excess  of  light,  or  with  the  want 
of  it,  who  does  not  see,  that  to  this  nation,  trembling 
on  the  verge  of  dissolution,  it  is  the  only  possible  bond 
of  unity.  With  this  conviction  wrought  into  the  very 
texture  of  my  being,  I  believe  I  can  appreciate  this 
conflict,  —  can  understand  the  necessity  of  using  all  the 
powers  given  by  the  Constitution  for  the  suppression  of 
this  Rebellion.  They  are,  as  I  believe,  and  as  the  pro- 
gress of  our  arms  attests,  ample  for  the  purpose.  I  do 
not,  therefore,  see  the  wisdom  of  violating  or  impairing 
the  Constitution  in  the  effort  to  save  it,  or  of  passing 
from  the  pestilent  heresy  of  State  secession  to  the 
equally  fatal  one  of  State  suicide.  The  fruits  of 
the  first  are  anarchy  and  perpetual  border  war ;  of  the 
second,  the  growth  of  military  power,  the  loss  of 
the  centrifugal  force  of  the  States,  the  merging  of  the 
States  in  the  central  Government :  a  Republic  in  name 
and  form ;  in  substance  and  effect,  a  despotism. 

Mr.  Speaker,  at  a  time  like  this,  the  individual  is 
nothing;  the  country,  every  thing.  He  cannot  truly 
serve  or  love  his  country  who  is  anxious  about  himself. 
He  cannot  have  a  single  eye  to  the  welfare  of  the 
Republic,  if  both  eyes  are  turned  homeward.  He  can- 
not keep  step  to  the  music  of  the  Union  who  is  grinding 
fantasias  for  the  village  of  Buncombe.  One  may 


CONFISCATION.  61 

desire,  however,  not  to  be  wholly  misunderstood.  It 
has  been  said  that  I  am  opposed  to  any  emancipation 
of  the  slaves  of  rebels.  Nothing  can  be  further  from 
the  truth.  The  first  provision  for  emancipation,  —  that 
in  the  statute  of  Aug.  6,  1861,  liberating  all  slaves 
employed  in  the  Rebellion,  —  I  drew  -with  my  own 
hand ;  believing  now,  as  then,  that  it  is  valid  and  just. 
For  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  this  District,  for  the 
interdiction  of  slavery  in  the  Territories,  for  the  new 
article  of  war  forbidding  the  officers  of  the  army  to 
surrender  fugitives  from  service,  my  votes  are  on  re- 
cord. I  voted  for  the  resolution  recommended  by  the 
President  for  aid  to  the  States  in  the  work  of  gradual 
emancipation ;  though  I  could  not  fail  to  see  that  it  was 
on  the  verge  of  authority,  and  must  perhaps  finally 
rest,  like  the  purchase  of  Louisiana,  upon  general  con- 
sent. My  views  of  the  power  of  the  Commander-in- 
chief  on  the  subject  of  emancipation  are  fully  stated 
in  remarks  submitted  to  the  House  on  the  10th  of  April. 
I  will  not  repeat  them.  They  are  ample  for  any  emer- 
gency. In  the  bill  I  introduced  "  for  the  more  effectual 
suppression  of  the  Rebellion,"  but  which,  in  the  pre- 
sent temper  of  the  House,  I  thought  it  useless  to  press, 
I  have  indicated  a  practical  method  by  which  the  slaves 
of  rebels  may  be  emancipated,  as  the  penalty  for  crime, 
upon  conviction  or  default  of  the  offender.  But,  Mr. 
Speaker,  I  have  kept  my  eye  steadily  upon  the  end  for 
which  this  war  is  waged,  —  the  only  end  for  which  it 
can  be  justified,  —  the  integrity  of  the  Union.  I  have 
firmly  resisted,  and  shall  continue  firmly  to  resist,  every 
effort,  open  or  disguised,  to  convert  this  war  for 'the 


62  CONFISCATION. 

Union  into  a  war  for  emancipation,  at  the  risk — no, 
not  at  the  risk,  for  the  words  do  not  express  what  I 
mean  or  feel,  with  the  moral  certainty  —  of  defeating 
the  purpose  for  which  the  war  was  begun.  With  these 
convictions,  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say,  I  cordially 
approve  the  course  of  President  Lincoln  in  modifying 
the  proclamation  of  General  Fremont,  and  declaring  null 
and  void  the  order  of  General  Hunter.  For  the  wisdom 
and  patriotism  which  have  thus  far  marked  the  course 
of  this  magistrate,  he  has  my  respect  and  gratitude. 

A  word  upon  the  policy  and  wisdom  of  these  mea- 
sures. A  great  work  has  been  done  by  this  nation.  It 
is  easy  to  find  fault.  In  operations  upon  so  large  a 
scale,  requiring  so  many  agencies,  mistakes  and  blunders 
will  be  made.  But  a  just  criticism,  looking  upon  the 
work  as  a  whole,  cannot  fail  to  commend  the  patriotism 
of  the  people  and  the  energy  of  the  Government.  I 
know  it  has  been  prettily  said,  that  we  have  prosecuted 
this  war  upon  "  a  rose-water  policy."  I  do  not  know 
that  I  fully  comprehend  what  is  meant ;  but  probably 
the  rebels,  in  view  of  that  long  blockade,  with  the  fresh 
memories  of  Port  Royal,  Newbern,  Pulaski,  Donelson, 
Pea  Ridge,  Shiloh,  the  Lower  Mississippi,  and  York- 
town,  and  the  ever-tightening  folds  of  the  constriction, 
might  say  with  Juliet,  the 

"Rose 
By  any  other  name  would  smell  as  sweet." 

Our  armies  and  navies  are  victorious.  The  war  seems 
to  be  drawing  to  a  close.  There  is  reasonable  ground 
to  hope,  that,  before  the  next  session  of  Congress,  the 
power  of  the  Rebellion  will  be  broken,  and  the  sword 


CONFISCATION.  63 

have  substantially  done  its  work.  But  I  cannot  con- 
ceal from  myself  that  our  great  difficulties  lie  beyond 
the  conflict  of  arms.  It  is  the  part  of  wise  courage  to 
look  them  calmly  in  the  face,  to  gauge  them,  and  gird 
up  our  loins  to  meet  them.  Action  will  be  needed, 
not  words;  judgment,  not  passion.  Unless  there  be 
calm  and  fearless  statesmanship,  your  victories  will  have 
been  won  in  vain ;  a  statesmanship  that  honors  and 
respects  the  people,  but  is  willing  to  abide  its  sober 
second  thought. 

Civil  wars,  like  family  feuds,  have  been  fierce,  bitter, 
and  unrelenting.  The  bitterness  and  ferocity  mani- 
fested towards  us  by  the  rebels  cannot  but  arouse  the 
spirit  of  retaliation,  and  thirst  for  vengeance.  If  we 
yield  to  the  fierce  temptation,  the  war  will  become  one 
of  extermination.  Thus  far,  while  prosecuting  the 
war  with  vigor,  we  have  shown  the  moderation  and 
humanity  becoming  a  great  people.  I  pray  we  may 
continue  in  this  course.  There  is  wisdom  in  the  fable 
of  the  sun  and  the  north  wind.  There  is  power  in  for- 
bearance, in  magnanimity,  in  obedience  to  the  law  we 
seek  to  enforce,  in  the  spirit  of  forgiveness,  in  the 
"  mercy  which  seasons  justice."  Christ  knew  what  is 
in  man :  the  gospel  is  not  a  lie.  There  never  was  a 
juster  war  than  that  which  we  are  waging.  It  is  strictly 
a  war  of  self-defence,  the  defence  of  a  free  and  bene- 
ficent Government  against  traitors  in  arms  against  her. 
But  we  may  not  forget,  that,  to  those  in  the  Southern 
States  who  believe  in  the  right  of  secession,  this  war 
cannot  but  wear  the  aspect  of  a  war  of  invasion  and 
subjugation.  This  terrible  mistake  may  account  for 


64  CONFISCATION. 

their  bitterness,  though  it  is  no    palliation  for   their 
barbarities. 

Mr.  Speaker,  upon  no  subject  has  there  been  more  or 
looser  declamation  than  on  the  causes  of  this  Rebellion. 
At  one  moment,  we  are  assured  that  slavery  is  the  one 
great  criminal ;  at  the  next,  that  it  was  brought  about 
by  the  fraud,  falsehood,  and  violence  of  a  few  unprinci- 
pled leaders. 

Passing  this  subject  now  with  the  remark,  that  masses 
of  men  are  not  easily  moved,  that  civil  convulsions  are 
fed  by  deeper  fires,  I  ask  your  attention  to  two  facts 
which  seem  to  be  clearly  established.  The  first  is,  that, 
when  the  acts  of  secession  were  passed,  the  majority  of 
the  people  of  the  revolting  States,  with  the  exception 
of  South  Carolina,  were  loyal  to  the  Union ;  and  the 
second  is,  that  to-day  their  feelings  are  changed,  their 
loyalty  turned  to  treason,  and  love  to  hate.  Passion  is 
eloquent ;  but  do  not  content  yourselves  with  bitter 
denunciation.  Pause,  I  beseech  and  adjure  you,  and 
inquire  what  is  the  cause. 

The  war  brought  to  their  homes  and  firesides  will 
account  for  much ;  but  do  you  not  believe  that  a  con- 
viction has  been  settling  down  into  the  minds  of  men, 
who  at  the  beginning  of  our  troubles  were  loyal,  that 
these  extreme  measures  point  to  some  other  end  than 
the  restoration  of  the  Union  with  the  rights  of  the 
States  preserved ;  that  they  mean  subjugation  and 
reconstruction  "  by  permission  of  the  military  power, 
and  not  before  "  I  Once  committed  to  this  policy,  once 
afloat  on  this  sea  of  revolution,  neither  you  nor  I  may 
live  to  reach  the  haven  of  Union  and  peace. 


CONFISCATION.  65 

If  these  measures  shall  be  finally  adopted,  I  pray  God 
I  may  prove  a  false  prophet,  and  that  "  out  of  this  nettle 
danger  we  may  pluck  the  flower  safety ; "  that  his 
strength  may  be  manifested  in  our  weakness ;  and  that 
he  may  overrule  all  our  errors  and  shortcomings  for  the 
good  of  our  beloved  country. 


66 


THE   TREASURY-NOTE   BILL. 


IN  .THE  HOUSE   OF   REPRESENTATIVES,   FEB.  6,  1862. 

The  House  being  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  on  the  State  of 
the  Union,  and  having  under  consideration  the  Treasury-note  Bill, 
Mr.  THOMAS  said,  — 

Mr.  CHAIRMAN,  —  I  am  anxious  to  vote  for  some 
measure  for  the  speedy  relief  of  the  Government.  I 
have  listened  with  care  to  the  whole  debate,  with  the 
hope  that  the  difficulties  which  had  occurred  to  my  own 
mind  might  be  relieved.  Nay,  more :  I  have  diligently 
sought  to  convince  myself  that  it  was  in  the  power  of 
Congress  to  pass  this  bill,  including  the  provision  mak- 
ing the  treasury  notes  legal  tender  for  all  public  and 
private  debts.  I  have  wished  to  see  also  that  the  bill 
could  be  passed,  and  the  good  faith  of  this  Government 
maintained.  I  have  failed  upon  both  of  these  points ; 
and,  with  the  indulgence  of  the  Committee,  will  state 
briefly  some  of  the  reasons  which  will  lead  me  to  vote 
against  the  bill  as  it  now  stands. 

The  question  at  the  threshold  of  the  discussion  is 
that  of  legal  power,  the  competency  of  Congress  to  pass 
the  bill.  Congress  has  upon  this  subject  the  powers 
given  to  it  by  the  Constitution.  This  is  a  Government 
of  specific  powers,  supreme  in  their  sphere,  but  the 
sphere  confessedly  limited. 


THE    TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  67 

We  look  to  the  Constitution  to  see  if  the  power  is 
given.  We  do  not  say  the  power  is  not  denied,  and 
therefore  exists ;  but  that  it  is  not  granted,  and  there- 
fore does  not  exist.  The  powers  granted  are  express  or 
implied,  are  given  in  terms,  or  are  the  reasonable  in- 
ferences from  the  express  grants.  Now,  it  is  conceded 
that  there  is  no  express  power  given  to  Congress  to 
make  the  notes  or  bills  of  the  Government  legal  tender. 
There  is  a  power  given  to  Congress  upon  the  subject- 
matter.  It  has  the  power  "  to  coin  money,  regulate  the 
value  thereof  and  of  foreign  coins." 

These  words,  "to  coin  money,"  have  a  plain  and 
obvious  meaning.  The  only  coinage  is  that  of  the 
metals,  "  hard  money."  To  coin  money,  and  regulate 
the  value  thereof,  is  to  fix  its  legal  value,  the  value  for 
which  it  is  to  be  received  as  an  equivalent  in  commerce 
and  in  discharge  of  obligations  and  contracts.  This 
constitutional  power  of  coinage  was  first  executed  by 
the  statute  of  1792,  and  that  statute  has  a  provision 
making  the  coins  legal  tender;  but  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  that,  whenever  money  is  coined  by  Government 
under  the  Constitution,  it  becomes  ipso  facto  legal  tender. 
But,  whether  legislation  be  necessary  to  carry  the  provi- 
sion into  effect  or  not,  it  is  too  plain  for  argument,  that 
the  power  to  coin  money  and  regulate  its  value  is  the 
power  to  say  for  what  value  it  shall  be  received. 

There  being  no  express  power  in  the  Constitution 
to  make  these  treasury  notes  a  legal  tender,  is  such  a 
power  to  be  reasonably  inferred  from  any  of  the  express 
powers'?  Before  answering  this  question,  two  things 
are  to  be  observed. 


68  THE    TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

The  first  is,  that,  there  being  an  express  grant  of 
power  upon  this  subject  of  the  coming  of  money  and 
fixing  its  legal  value,  we  should  not  reasonably  expect 
to  find  an  additional  power  on  the  same  subject  given 
by  implication.  The  expression  of  the  one  would  ordi- 
narily be  the  exclusion  of  the  other.  The  second  thing 
to  be  noted  is,  that  it  appears  by  the  debates  of  the 
Constitutional  Convention,  and  by  the  note  of  Mr. 
Madison,  that  this  subject  was  before  the  convention, 
and  that  a  grant  of  power  to  emit  bills  of  credit,  with 
the  apparent  purpose  of  making  them  legal  tender, 
was  refused.  —  Pages  1343-46. 

It  is  said  that  the  power  to  make  these  notes  a  legal 
tender  is  a  reasonable  implication  from  the  power  "  to 
regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations,  among  the 
States,  and  with  the  Indian  tribes."  The  argument  is, 
and  it  is  entitled  to  consideration,  that  money  is  one 
of  the  great  instruments  of  commerce,  as  much  so  as 
the  ship  ;  and  that  the  power  to  regulate  the  principal 
thing  is  the  power  to  regulate  its  instrumentalities.  I 
confess,  that,  at  first,  this  view  of  the  question  impressed 
me.  But  further  reflection  has  satisfied  me  it  is  not 
sound.  If  the  Constitution  were  otherwise  silent  upon 
the  subject,  the  implication  would  doubtless  be  a  strong 
one. 

But  the  Constitution  has  spoken  ;  has  indicated  what 
shall  be  money  under  its  provisions,  and  the  power  of 
Congress  over  it. 

Again:  the  practical  construction  of  the  Constitution 
has  been,  that  no  such  power  existed.  Though  the  exi- 
gencies of  the  Government  have  heretofore  been  great, 


THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  69 

the  experiment  has  never  been  tried ;  nor,  so  far  as  I 
know,  ever  before  suggested. 

Of  the  three  great  statesmen  whose  minds  have  been 
given  to  this  subject  of  the  currency,  and  the  power  of 
the  National  Government  over  it,  no  one  has  asserted 
the  existence  of  this  power.  Mr.  Madison  and  Mr. 
Webster  have  expressly  denied  its  existence.  Mr.  Web- 
ster had,  of  all  our  statesmen,  except  perhaps  Mr. 
Hamilton,  the  strongest  convictions  of  the  necessity  of 
a  national  currency,  and  of  the  duty  of  Congress  to  con- 
trol it ;  but,  on  the  want  of  power  in  Congress  to  make 
any  thing  but  coin  legal  tender,  his  language  is  clear, 
firm,  and  unequivocal.  He  says, — 

"  But  if  we  understand  by  currency  the  legal  money  of  the  country, 
and  that  which  constitutes  a  legal  tender  for  debts,  and  is  the  statute 
measure  of  value,  then,  undoubtedly,  nothing  is  included  but  gold  and 
silver.  Most  unquestionably,  there  is  no  legal  tender,  and  there  can  be 
no  legal  tender,  in  this  country,  under  the  authority  of  this  Government 
or  any  other,  but  gold  and  silver,  either  the  coinage  of  our  own  mints,  or 
foreign  coins  at  rates  regulated  by  Congress.  This  is  a  constitutional 
principle,  perfectly  plain,  and  of  the  very  highest  importance.  The 
States  are  expressly  prohibited  from  making  any  thing  but  gold  and 
silver  a  tender  in  payment  of  debts ;  and  although  no  such  express 
prohibition  is  applied  to  Congress,  yet,  as  Congress  has  no  power 
granted  to  it  in  this  respect  but  to  coin  money  and  to  regulate  the 
value  of  foreign  coins,  it  clearly  has  no  power  to  substitute  paper  or 
any  thing  else  for  coin  as  a  tender  in  payment  of  debts  and  in  discharge 
of  contracts.  Congress  has  exercised  this  power  fully  in  both  its 
branches.  It  has  coined  money,  and  still  coins  it ;  it  has  regulated  the 
value  of  foreign  coins,  and  still  regulates  their  value.  The  legal  ten- 
der, therefore,  the  constitutional  standard  of  value,  is  established,  and 
cannot  be  overthrown.  To  overthrow  it  would  shake  the  whole  system. 

"  But7  if  the  Constitution  knows  only  gold  and  silver  as  a  legal  ten- 
der, does  it  follow  that  the  Constitution  cannot  tolerate  the  voluntary 
circulation  of  bank-notes,  convertible  into  gold  and  silver  at  the  will 


70  THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

of  the  holder,  as  part  of  the  actual  money  of  the  country  ?  Is  a  man 
not  only  to  be  entitled  to  demand  gold  and  silver  for  every  debt,  but 
is  he,  or  should  he  be,  obliged  to  demand  it  in  all  cases  ?  Is  it,  or 
should  Government  make  it,  unlawful  to  receive  pay  in  any  thing 
else?  Such  a  notion  is  too  absurd  to  be  seriously  treated.  The 
constitutional  tender  is  the  thing  to  be  preserved  ;  and  it  ought  to  be 
preserved  sacredly,  under  all  circumstances.  —  Webster's  Works,  vol.  iv. 
p.  271. 

Again  he  says,  — 

"  I  am  certainly  of  opinion,  then,  that  gold  and  silver,  at  rates 
fixed  by  Congress,  constitute  the  legal  standard  of  value  in  this  coun- 
try ;  and  that  neither  Congress  nor  any  State  has  authority  to  establish 
any  other  standard  or  to  displace  this."  —  Ibid.,  vol.  iv.  p.  280. 

This  is  good  law  and  solid  sense. 

There  is,  Mr.  Chairman,  another  difficulty  in  inferring 
from  the  power  of  Congress  to  regulate  commerce  the 
power  to  make  treasury  notes  legal  tender,  which  has 
not  been  adverted  to.  It  is  this :  The  power  given  to 
Congress  is  to  regulate  commerce  "  among  the  States." 
Now,  it  is  clear  in  principle,  and  well  settled  as  authority, 
that  the  provision  does  not  extend  to  and  include  the 
internal  commerce  of  the  States.  This  power  is  reserved 
to  the  States  themselves  (Gibbons  vs.  Ogden,  12  Whea- 
ton,  1).  Looking  at  this  power  to  make  these  notes  a 
legal  tender  as  incident  to  the  power  of  Congress  to 
regulate  commerce,  the  power  of  the  incident  cannot 
extend  beyond  the  power  of  the  principal.  This  bill 
clearly  includes  a  commerce  over  which  we  have  no 
control.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  this  internal 
commerce  would  include  nine  out  of  ten  of  all  the  bar- 
gains that  are  made. 

It  has  been  said,  that,  under  the  power  to  "  borrow 


THE    TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  71 

• 

money  on  the  credit  of  the  United  States,"  we  have  the 
power  to  make  the  securities  given  for  borrowed  money 
legal  tender ;  that  is  to  say,  under  the  power  to  borrow, 
we  have  the  power  to  create. 

It  would  seem  to  be  a  sufficient  answer  to  this  posi- 
tion to  say,  that,  if  the  Government  had  the  power  to 
make  its  notes  money  by  its  superscription  only,  there 
would  be  no  great  need  to  borrow. 

It  has  been  argued,  that  because  the  power  is  denied 
to  the  States  to  make  "  any  thing  but  gold  and  silver  a 
tender  in  payment  of  debts,"  and  is  not  denied  in  terms 
to  Congress,  it  therefore  exists  in  Congress.  To  this 
position  the  answer  is  twofold :  First,  that  the  express 
power  has  been  given  to  Congress  of  coining  money, 
and  regulating  its  value;  the  value  for  which  it  is  to 
be  received  in  the  marts  of  commerce  in  the  payment  of 
debts  or  the  measure  of  damages.  The  money  so 
coined  is  the  only  money  known  to  the  Constitution. 
The  Constitution  never  confounds,  as  does  this  bill, 
money  with  the  promise  to  pay  money,  the  shadow  with 
the  substance,  the  sign  with  the  thing  signified.  The 
second  and  obvious  answer  is,  that  the  power,  not 
being  delegated  to  Congress,  is  reserved,  under  article 
ten  of  the  Amendments,  to  the  people.  The  people, 
acting  in  the  light  of  their  own  terrible  experience, 
would  neither  give  the  power  to  Congress,  nor  permit  its 
exercise  by  the  States.  If  the  power  to  make  money  of 
paper  is  an  attribute  of  sovereignty,  as  the  friends 
of  this  bill  aver,  the  attribute  yet  rests  securely  in  the 
bosom  of  the  sovereign.  The  people  have  not  parted 
with  this  power  of  evil. 


72  THE    TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

Mr.  Chairman,  though  the  legal  question  has  not 
been  judicially  settled,  I  feel  compelled  to  say  that  the 
weight  of  reasoning  and  authority  is  strongly  against 
the  validity  of  the  clause  making  the  treasury  notes 
legal  tender.  If  the  validity  of  the  provision  be  doubt- 
ful even,  and  it  becomes,  as  it  inevitably  would,  the 
subject  of  contest  and  litigation  in  the  courts,  the  effect 
upon  the  credit  of  the  paper  will,  in  my  judgment, 
be  worse  than  if  the  tender  clause  had  been  wholly 
omitted. 

I  have  a  word  or  two  to  say  upon  the  justice  of  this 
clause  of  the  bill. 

To  make  these  notes  legal  tender  for  debts,  private 
and  public,  contracted  before  the  passage  of  the  bill, 
seems  to  me  a  clear  breach  of  good  faith.  Debts  are 
obligations  or  promises  to  pay  money,  the  only  money 
known  to  the  Constitution  and  laws ;  the  universal  equi- 
valent having  not  merely  intrinsic  value,  but  being  the 
measure  and  standard  of  value.  Paper  is  not  money. 
The  draft,  bill,  or  note,  is  the  mere  sign :  money  is  the 
thing  signified.  Said  John  Locke,  "  Men  in  their  bar- 
gains contract,  not  for  denominations  or  sounds,  but  for 
the  intrinsic  value" 

This  bill,  Mr.  Chairman,  changes  the  condition  and 
practically  impairs  the  obligation  of  every  existing  con- 
tract to  pay  money.  When  the  contract  to  pay  money 
matures,  this  bill  compels  the  creditor  to  take  for  his 
debt,  not  money,  not  even  paper  convertible  into  money 
on  demand,  but  the  promise  of  Government  to  pay  at  a 
future  day  uncertain.  It  is  a  perfect  answer  of  the 
creditor  to  this  proposition  to  say,  "That  is  not  my 


THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  73 

agreement :    a  matured  debt  is  not  paid  by  a  promise 
to  pay." 

But  further :  the  faith  of  the  contract  is  broken,  be- 
cause the  creditor  is  not  paid  in  gold  or  silver,  nor  in 
that  which  is  equivalent  to  gold  and  silver.  He  neither 
gets  the  com,  nor  its  value  in  any  form  ;  the  money,  nor 
the  money's  worth.  Take,  for  example,  one  of  the 
treasury  notes  issued  under  the  act  of  July  17,  payable 
in  three  years,  with  interest  at  the  rate  of  seven  and 
three-tenths  per  cent  semi-annually.  When  the  interest 
is  due,  the  Government  is  asked  to  pay.  It  offers  its 
note  convertible  into  stock  worth  now  eighty-eight  cents 
on  the  dollar.  The  holder  of  the  note  reads  the  ninth 
section  of  the  statute  of  July :  — 

"  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  faith  of  the  United  States  is 
hereby  solemnly  pledged  for  the  payment  of  the  interest,  and  redemp- 
tion of  the  principal,  of  the  loan  authorized  by  this  act." 

If  the  lender  had  understood  that  by  payment  of 
interest  was  meant  the  giving  another  note,  payable  at 
the  pleasure  of  the  Government,  would  the  loan  have 
been  effected  \  When,  by  compulsion,  he  takes  your 
note,  and  converts  it  into  stock,  worth,  it  may  be,  eighty- 
eight  or  seventy-five  cents  on  a  dollar,  will  he  go  away 
with  the  conviction,  that  the  faith  of  the  United  States, 
so  solemnly  pledged,  has  been  as  solemnly  redeemed  \ 
Will  he  not  feel  that  faith  without  works  is  dead  \  No 
craft  of  logic  or  of  rhetoric  can  disguise  the  real  nature 
of  that  transaction.  If  we  feel  stain  like  a  wound,  that 
wound  is  immedicable.  Take  from  us,  Mr.  Chairman, 
our  property,  houses,  and  lands,  —  they  cannot  be  de- 

10 


74  THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

voted  to  a  nobler  cause :  but,  in  God's  name,  leave  us 
the  consciousness  of  integrity ;  leave  us  our  self-respect. 
Delays  may  be  inevitable ;  but  we  will  pay  the  uttermost 
farthing. 

If  the  provision  of  the  bill  be  not  just,  it  is,  of  course, 
impolitic.  It  will  wound  our  credit  vitally.  It  will 
defeat  the  very  end  it  was  designed  to  accomplish. 
That  credit  can  only  be  maintained  as  individuals  or 
as  a  nation  by  the  utmost  fidelity  to  our  engagements  ; 
by  keeping  our  promises  as  we  keep  our  oaths,  —  regis- 
tered in  heaven. 

No  matter  what  may  be  the  resources  of  the  country ; 
no  matter  what  may  be  its  actual  wealth,  or  its  capacity 
to  acquire  it :  your  creditor  has  no  lien  upon  your  pro- 
perty. He  can  make  no  levy  upon  your  lands  or  goods. 
If  you  refuse  or  fail  to  pay,  he  is  without  remedy. 
After  all,  his  sole  reliance  must  be  upon  your  good 
faith.  In  the  keeping  of  that  is  his  security  and  your 
credit.  And  you  cannot  afford  the  experiment  of  giving 
him  paper  when  you  promised  him  money.  It  will  cost 
you,  in  the  long-run,  even  more  than  it  will  cost  him. 

This  provision  of  the  bill,  in  the  nature  of  a  forced 
loan,  is  itself  a  confession  of  weakness.  It  seeks  to 
compel  credit  for  the  reason  that  it  does  not  come  spon- 
taneously. It  assumes  that  force  is  necessary  to  uphold 
that  which  must  stand  on  its  own  legs,  or  cannot  stand 
at  all.  Credit  is  faith,  is  trust,  is  confidence.  If  you 
faithfully  keep  your  promises  ;  if  by  taxation  you  avail 
yourselves  of  all  the  resources  of  the  country  for  the 
salvation  of  the  country ;  if  you  keep  always  in  view 
the  end  for  which  this  conflict  is  waged ;  if,  in  seek- 


THE    TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  75 

ing  to  enforce  the  Constitution  and  the  laws,  you 
show  a  readiness  yourselves  to  obey  the  Constitution 
and  the  laws,  you  will  win  credit :  you  cannot  com- 
mand or  enforce  it.  It  will  follow  in  the  footsteps 
of  rectitude :  you  cannot  drive  it  before  you.  You 
may  by  this  bill  say  that  paper  is  money;  give  the 
same  name  to  things  vitally  different.  The  essential 
difference  will  be  none  the  less  clearly  perceived  and 
strongly  felt.  It  is  no  want  of  respect  to  say  to  you, 
You  cannot  change  the  nature  of  things. 

The  friends  of  this  feature  of  the  bill,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, admit  the  reluctance  with  which  they  assent  to  it. 
The  only  ground  of  defence  is  its  necessity ;  that  no 
alternative  is  left  to  us.  I  respect  their  motives  :  I  can- 
not see  the  necessity. 

We  have  spent  a  great  deal  of  money  in  this  war, 
and  have  wasted  a  great  deal.  But  we  are  not  impov- 
erished. What  we  have  spent  is  trivial  in  comparison 
to  what  is  left.  The  amount  up  to  this  time  will  not 
exceed  two  years  of  surplus  profits.  It  is  not  more  than 
one  thirty-second  part  of  our  whole  property.  Not  a 
dollar  of  tax  has  been  raised ;  and  yet  we  are  talking  of 
national  bankruptcy,  and  launching  upon  a  paper  cur- 
rency. I  may  be  very  dull ;  but  I  cannot  see  the  neces- 
sity or  the  wisdom  of  such  a  course. 

Gentlemen  who  appreciate  the  perils  of  this  step 
would  relieve  themselves  and  us  by  the  assurance,  that 
the  amount  of  paper  to  be  issued  is  restricted  within 
safe  bounds.  These  barriers  are  easily  surmounted.  It 
is  the  first  step  which  costs.  The  descent  has  always 
been  easy.  The  difficulty  is  return.  The  experience 


76  THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

of  mankind  shows  the  danger  in  entering  upon  this 
path;  that  boundaries  are  fixed  only  to  be  overrun, 
promises  made  only  to  be  broken.  Human  nature  re- 
mains essentially  the  same.  We  are  neither  wiser  nor 
better  than  our  fathers.  The  theatre  changes,  but  not 
the  actors  or  the  drama.  In  speaking  of  emissions  of 
paper-money,  Hamilton,  the  greatest  of  our  statesmen, 
and  the  most  sagacious  of  our  financiers,  says, — 

"  The  wisdom  of  the  Government  will  be  shown  in  never  trusting 
itself  with  the  use  of  so  seducing  and  dangerous  an  expedient.  In 
times  of  tranquillity,  it  might  have  no  ill  consequence  ;  it  might  even 
perhaps  be  managed  in  a  way  to  be  productive  of  good  :  but,  in 
great  and  trying  emergencies,  there  is  almost  a  moral  certainty  of  its 
becoming  mischievous.  The  stamping  of  paper  is  an  operation  so 
much  easier  than  the  laying  of  taxes,  that  a  government  in  the  practice 
of  paper  emissions  would  rarely  fail,  in  any  such  emergency,  to 
indulge  itself  too  far  in  the  employment  of  that  resource,  to  avoid, 
as  much  as  possible,  one  less  auspicious  to  present  popularity."  — 
Hamilton's  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  124. 

The  ordinary  check,  the  only  effectual  check,  in  the 
issue  of  paper  for  currency,  the  security  of  the  public 
against  excess  in  its  issue,  is  that  the  excess  will  be 
returned  upon  the  banks  for  gold  and  silver.  A  certain 
amount  is  needed  for  the  purposes  of  the  currency. 
When  that  point  is  reached,  the  paper  begins  to  decline, 
the  gold  and  silver  are  demanded,  and  the  issues  of 
paper  are  contracted.  If  there  be  an  excess  of  gold 
and  silver,  it  will  right  itself  by  exportation,  or  find  its 
way  into  the  arts.  To  the  issue  of  this  paper  there  is 
no  natural  check  or  restraint.  When  it  begins  to  depre- 
ciate, the  necessity  is  at  once  created  for  increasing  the 
issues ;  public  distrust  is  increased ;  and  this  again  leads 


THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL.  77 

to  still  further  depreciation  and  to  still  larger  issues. 
The  process  of  decline  is  easy,  natural,  inevitable. 

The  results  are  the  familiar  things  of  history :  prices 
expand  ;  "  new  ways  to  pay  old  debts "  are  opened ; 
the  hearts  of  men  glow  as  with  new  wine.  But  all  is 
unreal :  not  a  farthing  is  added  to  the  substantial 
wealth  of  the  country.  The  seeming  prosperity,  "  hav- 
ing no  root  in  itself,  abides  but  for  a  time."  The  con- 
traction and  depression  are  as  rapid  and  as  great  as 
were  the  rise  and  exaltation  ;  and  men  come  down  from 
the  cloud-land  to  mourn  over  blighted  hopes  and  broken 
promises  and  wasted  fortunes,  and  to  feel  soberly  that 
the  laws  of  nature  and  of  Providence  are  stronger  than 
the  laws  or  the  hopes  of  men. 

One  thing  to  be  noted  is,  that  the  heaviest  share  of 
the  burden  always  falls  upon  labor.  Never  were  wiser 
words  than  those  of  Mr.  Webster :  "  Of  all  contri- 
vances for  cheating  the  laboring  classes  of  mankind, 
none  has  been  more  effectual  than  that  which  deluded 
them  with  paper-money.  Ordinary  tyranny,  oppression, 
excessive  taxation,  —  these  bear  lightly  on  the  mass  of 
the  community,  compared  with  fraudulent  currencies  and 
the  robberies  committed  by  depreciated  paper." 

A  word,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I  will  relieve  the  patience 
of  the  Committee.  It  has  been  said  that  coming  gene- 
rations ought  to  bear  a  large  part  of  the  expenses  of 
this  war,  and  that  we  may  therefore  justly  create  a  large 
public  debt.  A  debt  will  doubtless  be  created ;  but  the 
burdens  of  the  war  ought,  as  far  as  possible,  to  fall 
upon  the  men  of  this  generation.  We  are  but  keep- 
ing in  repair  the  structure  of  our  fathers,  not  building 


78  THE   TREASURY-NOTE    BILL. 

i 

a  new  one.  This  expense  should  be  borne  mainly  by 
the  tenants  for  life,  and  not  by  the  heirs.  For  the 
discharge  of  this  duty,  we  need  four  things:  unity  of 
purpose,  energy  of  action,  the  largest  possible  taxation, 
and  the  severest  possible  retrenchment. 


79 


RECOGNITION  OF   LIBERIA   AND   HAYTI. 


HOUSE   OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  JUNE   3,   1862. 

Mr.  SPEAKER,  —  After  the  excellent  speech  of  my 
friend  and  colleague  who  introduced  this  bill  [Mr. 
Gooch],  any  thing  like  elaborate  argument  is  unneces- 
sary ;  but  I  desire  to  state  very  briefly  the  reasons  which 
will  induce  me  to  vote  for  it,  and  especially  for  that 
portion  of  it  which  recognizes  the  independence  and 
establishes  diplomatic  relations  with  the  Republic  of 
Liberia.  My  interest  in  this  State  of  Liberia  was  an 
early  and  strong  one.  Whether  we  look  at  its  past  his- 
tory or  at  its  probable  future  destiny,  it  is  among  the 
most  interesting  of  modern  States.  The  Government 
and  people  of  this  country  sustain  to  it  a  near  and  inti- 
mate relation.  It  was  planted  by  our  care.  It  is  the 
fruit  of  the  labors,  the  sacrifices,  and  the  prayers  of  wise 
and  good  men  among  us.  Its  existence  is  a  slight 
atonement  for  the  cruelty,  the  perfidy,  the  injustice, 
which  by  us,  as  by  other  Christian  States,  have  been 
lavished  on  the  continent  of  Africa,  the  land  of  God's 
sunshine  and  of  man's  hate.  It  is  the  outpost  of  her 
civilization ;  the  opened  gateway  through  which  the  arts 
of  peace,  social  order  and  Christianity,  may  enter,  and 
gain  a  permanent  foothold. 


80  RECOGNITION    OF   LIBERIA    AND    HAYTI. 

That  Liberia  is  of  sufficient  commercial  importance 
to  justify  the  institution  of  diplomatic  relations  with 
her,  has  been  clearly  shown.  Every  year  will  develop, 
quicken,  and  enlarge  this  commerce,  if  we  choose  to 
watch  over  and  protect  it.  Our  interests  lie  in  the  path 
of  our  duty. 

I  am  not  prepared,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  say  that  the 
recognition  of  an  independent  State,  although  it  may 
have  sufficient  power  to  maintain  both  commercial  and 
political  relations  with  us,  is  a  matter  of  absolute  duty 
under  the  law  of  nations.  It  is,  perhaps,  what  moral 
writers  would  call  a  duty  of  imperfect  obligation.  But 
in  respect  to  this  colony,  and  to  the  men  who  have 
gone  out  from  this  country  to  plant  and  train  it  up,  there 
has  been  from  the  beginning  an  assurance  of  the  assist- 
ance, the  counsel,  and  the  protection  of  this  Govern- 
ment ;  and  the  recognition  on  our  part  is  required  by 
good  faith  as  well  as  sound  policy.  Other  nations  have 
preceded  us  in  the  recognition.  It  was  our  duty  and 
privilege  to  have  been  first. 

If  there  were  no  elements  entering  into  the  discussion 
of  this  question  but  the  relations  which  the  Republic  of 
Liberia  holds  to-day  to  the  rest  of  the  civilized  world, 
the  importance  of  its  commerce,  of  its  capacity  to  main- 
tain, as  it  has  for  years  maintained,  an  independent 
Government,  with  the  fact  that  two  of  the  most  power- 
ful nations  of  the  earth  have  already  recognized  its 
independence,  there  would  have  been  no  discussion  of 
this  bill.  The  only  ground  of  objection  is,  that  that 
State  has  been  planted  and  built  up  by  an  inferior  race 
of  men. 


RECOGNITION    OF    LIBERIA    AND    HAYTI.  81 

I  have  no  desire  to  enter  into  the  question  of  the 
relative  capacity  of  races ;  but,  if  the  inferiority  of  the 
African  race  were  established,  the  inference  as  to  our 
duty  would  be  very  plain.  If  this  colony  has  been  built 
up  by  an  inferior  race  of  men,  it  has  a  yet  stronger 
claim  on  our  countenance,  recognition,  and,  if  need  be, 
protection.  The  instincts  of  the  human  mind  and  heart 
concur  with  the  policy  of  men  and  governments  to  help 
and  protect  the  weak.  To  a  child  or  to  a  woman  I  am 
to  show  a  degree  of  forbearance,  kindness,  gentleness 
even,  which  I  am  not  necessarily  to  extend  to  my  equal. 

But,  sir,  this  colony  is  founded  by  black  men,  and  not 
by  white.  If  my  friend  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Cox]  had  intro- 
duced a  resolution  that  all  commerce  should  be  inter- 
dicted with  the  "  Black  Sea,"  I  should  not  have  been 
more  surprised.  I  am  not  aware  that  the  law  of  nations 
or  the  comity  of  nations  recognizes  the  distinction  be- 
tween black  and  white  men ;  and  it  is  rather  late  to 
attempt  to  ingraft  it  upon  the  code. 

Upon  the  question  of  admission  to  the  society  of 
nations,  the  law  looks  to  the  capacity  of  the  State  to 
maintain  self-government,  its  capacity  for  political  and 
commercial  relations,  and  its  general  conformity  to  the 
usages  and  manners  of  civilized  States. 

Mr.  Cox.  I  ask  my  friend  from  Massachusetts, 
whether  the  law  of  nations  does  not  apply  now,  without 
this  recognition  of  Liberia  and  Hayti ;  and  whether  we 
can  make  the  law  of  nations  apply  by  passing  this  act 
of  Congress. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  will  answer  the  question  with  plea- 
sure. If,  within  the  rules  of  the  law  of  nations,  the 

11 


82  RECOGNITION    OF    LIBERIA    AND    HAYTI. 

States  of  Liberia  and  Hayti  are  now  independent 
powers,  then  it  is  plain,  that,  by  this  resolution,  we  re- 
cognize only  an  existing  status  or  fact.  I  do  understand, 
Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  Republics  of  Liberia  and  Hayti 
to-day  belong  to  the  society  of  States:  but  what  we 
have  to  pass  upon  now  is,  whether  this  nation  will  affirm 
their  admission,  and  hold  with  them  commercial  and 
diplomatic  relations  ;  and,  if  so,  to  what  extent?  If  the 
position  of  my  friend  from  Ohio  be  right,  as  I  dare  say 
it  is,  that  they  are  already  independent  States,  then  we 
are  doing  no  harm,  surely,  in  recognizing  and  confirm- 
ing what  other  nations  have  done. 

But  the  precise  question  is,  whether  we  can  fairly 
regard  the  fact  of  the  color  of  the  race  by  which  the 
State  has  been  built  up  and  maintained  in  deciding  this 
matter.  My  position  is,  that  by  no  just  application  of 
the  principles  of  international  law  can  that  distinction 
be  made.  Nor  is  the  question  before  us  a  question  of 
taste,  much  less  of  narrow  prejudice.  The  question, 
whether  a  minister  from  a  foreign  State  is  to  be  received, 
is  to  be  determined  on  higher  grounds.  Personal  objec- 
tions are  sometimes  interposed.  Nations  decline  to 
receive  as  ministers  persons  whose  residence  would,  by 
the  laws  or  usages  of  the  country,  be  inadmissible  ;  but 
I  am  not  aware  of  rejection  from  the  hue  of  the  skin. 

President  Roberts,  of  the  Republic  of  Liberia,  was 
here  some  years  ago.  Many  gentlemen  will  recollect 
him.  No  man  who  had  seen  him  and  conversed  with 
him,  or  who  knew  any  thing  of  his  character,  would  for 
a  moment  object  to  his  appearing  here  as  a  minister  of 
that  republic  to  this  Government.  Such  a  man  would 


RECOGNITION    OF    LIBERIA    AND    HAYTI.  83 

not  infect  even  the  pure  air  of  the  capital,  nor  would  he 
be  much  cowed  by  the  presence  of  a  superior  race ! 

But,  as  I  have  before  said,  Mr.  Speaker,  this  is  not  a 
question  of  taste.  It  is  a  question  of  the  fair  applica- 
tion of  the  principles  of  international  comity ;  it  is  a 
question,  whether  this  people  have  so  built  up  a  State 
as  to  have  a  fair  claim  to  the  recognition  of  this  Gov- 
ernment. 

It  is  said,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  if  we  are  to  make  this 
recognition,  and  to  establish  these  relations,  this  is  not 
the  proper  time  to  do  so.  Why  not  the  proper  time  ? 
This  State  has  been  in  a  condition  to  maintain  these 
relations  with  us  for  a  number  of  years.  But  a  portion 
of  the  representation  of  this  country  is  absent!  Not 
by  our  fault,  Mr.  Speaker.  Congress  is  not  to  cease  to 
exercise  the  functions  of  legislation  because  men  or 
States  are  not  here  to  attend  to  the  public  interests. 
If  they  choose  to  forego  their  privileges,  we  must,  never- 
theless, discharge  our  duties.  If  a  few  of  our  friends 
here  should  absent  themselves  from  our  discussions,  we 
should  not  consider  ourselves  under  any  obligation  what- 
ever, on  that  account,  to  give  up  the  ordinary  work  of 
legislation.  I  cannot  be  influenced  by  the  consideration, 
that  States  have  neglected  the  duty  imposed  upon  them 
by  the  Constitution.  We  are  to  determine  this  question 
upon  the  same  considerations  and  from  the  same 
motives  as  if  this  Rebellion  had  not  occurred. 

Mr.  Speaker,  so  far  from  being  deterred  from  this 
recognition  by  this  question  of  race,  I  would  make  this 
recognition  the  sooner  because  it  was  some  measure  of 
atonement  to  a  grossly  wronged  and  injured  race.  While 


84  RECOGNITION    OF   LIBERIA   AND    HAYTI. 

I  am  ready  on  every  occasion,  in  this  House  and  else- 
where, to  recognize  and  affirm  the  rightful  power  of  the 
States  over  their  domestic  institutions,  I  am  not  to  con- 
ceal from  myself  the  fact,  that,  from  the  beginning  of 
the  history  of  the  country  to  this  hour,  our  course  as  a 
people  towards  that  race  has  been  one  of  cruelty  and 
injustice. 

There  are  two  things  in  this  country  which  are  often 
confounded,  but  which  are  not  very  nearly  akin, — 
hatred  of  the  slaveholder,  and  love  of  the  slave ;  ab- 
stract love  of  the  race,  and  practical  love  of  the  men 
who  compose  it.  I  frankly  confess,  Mr.  Speaker,  that 
I  have  never  been  more  grieved  on  this  floor,  than 
when  I  saw  gentlemen,  who  during  the  whole  winter 
have  been  ventilating  their  rhetoric  on  the  wrongs  of 
slavery  and  of  the  race  subject  to  its  iron  rule,  deliber- 
ately record  their  votes  against  extending  to  a  man  of 
color,  whatever  his  capacity  or  ability  or  fidelity,  the 
power  or  right  to  serve  the  Government,  even  in 
the  humble  capacity  of  carrying  the  mail  on  his  shoul- 
ders, or  on  horseback,  if  he  could  make  a  horse  contract. 
Rhetoric  is  beautiful ;  but  it  is  not  meat  or  bread  or 
raiment,  or  the  right  to  work  for  meat  or  bread  or  rai- 
ment. 

This  by  the  way.  It  cannot  escape  observation,  Mr. 
Speaker,  that  our  relations  with  the  States  of  Liberia 
and  Hayti  may  soon  assume  new  importance.  As  the 
result  of  the  legislation  of  the  last  session,  and  as 
the  natural,  inevitable  result  of  this  war,  the  number  of 
free  persons  of  color  in  this  country  will  be  greatly  in- 
creased. The  Free  States  are  barring  their  doors  against 


RECOGNITION    OF   LIBERIA    AND    HAYTI.  85 

them.  Abstract  love  is  simpler  and  easier  than  practi- 
cal. They  may  feel  the  necessity  of  going  out  from  the 
house  of  political  and  social  bondage.  The  doors  of 
Liberia  and  Hayti  are  open  to  receive  them.  Our  sym- 
pathy, our  aid,  our  protection,  ought  to  go  with  them  ; 
and  intimate  political  and  commercial  relations  will  be 
essential  for  those  ends. 

A  gentle  hint,  and  I  will  trespass  no  longer  on  the 
time  and  courtesy  of  my  colleague,  who  is  to  close 
the  debate.  Much  has  been  said,  justly  said,  on  this 
floor,  of  men  of  one  idea.  One  idea  does  not  make  a 
statesman,  more  than  one  swallow  makes  a  summer. 
We  do  not  admire  the  spring  that  can  fill  but  one 
bucket,  the  mill  that  will  grind  but  one  grist,  the  quiver 
with  one  arrow,  the  hen  with  one  chicken.  Again :  one 
idea  or  feeling  may  be  so  strong  as  to  give  color  to  all 
the  rest.  That  idea  or  feeling  may  be  ardent  aversion 
to  the  negro  race,  as  well  as  ardent  love  for  it.  In  shun- 
ning Scylla,  we  may  touch  Charybdis. 


86 


DEATH  OF  HON.   GOLDSMITH  F.  BAILEY. 


HOUSE   OF    REPRESENTATIVES,   MAY   15,  1862. 

MY  colleagues,  Mr.  Speaker,  have  assigned  to  me  the 
duty  of  announcing  to  the  House  the  death  of  one  of  our 
number  —  Hon.  Goldsmith  F.  Bailey,  at  his  home  in 
Fitchburg,  Mass.  —  on  the  8th  instant. 

The  story  of  his  life  is  a  brief  and  manly  one.  He 
was  born  on  the  17th  of  July,  1823,  in  Westmoreland, 
N.H. ;  a  State  that  has  given  to  her  sisters  so  many 
of  her  jewels,  and  yet  always  kept  her  casket  full  and 
sparkling.  An  orphan  at  the  age  of  two,  he  was  thrown 
wholly  upon  his  own  resources  at  the  age'  of  twelve. 
What  we  ordinarily  call  education  (schooling)  was 
finished  substantially  at  the  age  of  sixteen.  But  he 
early  discovered  that  the  only  true  culture  is  self-culture ; 
the  only  true  development,  self-development ;  that  in  the 
sweat  of  a  man's  own  face  he  must  eat  the  bread  of 
knowledge ;  and  that  in  the  school  of  narrow  fortune 
and  of  early  struggle  are  often  to  be  found  the  most 
invigorating  disciplines  and  the  wisest  teachers. 

At  the  age  of  sixteen,  he  began  to  learn  the  art  of 
printing.  We  need  but  glance  at  our  history,  or  look 
around  us  at  either  end  of  the  Capitol,  to  learn,  that  as 


DEATH    OF    HON.    GOLDSMITH    F.    BAILEY.  87 

printing  is  the  most  encyclopedic  of  arts,  so  the  printing- 
office  is  among  the  best  places  of  instruction.  In  diffus- 
ing knowledge,  the  pupil  acquires  it ;  and,  in  preparing 
the  instruments  for  educating  others,  educates  himself. 
I  have  revered  the  art  from  my  forefathers,  as  Paul 
would  have  said ;  and  mine,  therefore,  may  be  a  partial 
judgment:  but  some  of  the  best  educated  men  it  has 
been  my  pleasure  to  know  received  their  degrees  at  the 
printer's  college. 

Mr.  Bailey,  having  learned  his  art,  was  for  some  time 
the  associate  printer,  publisher,  and  editor  of  a  country 
newspaper ;  a  business,  I  suspect,  not  very  lucrative  or 
attractive.  It  did  not  fill  the  measure  of  his  hopes ; 
and,  in  1845,  he  left  the  printing-office  for  the  study  of 
the  law.  He  pursued  his  studies  in  the  office  of  Messrs. 
Torrey  and  Wood  of  Fitchburg,  sound  lawyers  and  most 
estimable  men.  Their  appreciation  of  their  student  was 
such,  that  upon  his  admission  to  the  bar  in  December, 
1848,  he  was  received  into  the  firm  as  a  partner. 

Mr.  Bailey  had  been  in  the  practice  of  his  profession 
some  thirteen  years  before  his  election  to  this  House. 
A  leading  position  at  the  bar  in  New  England  is  seldom 
attained  in  thirteen  years,  and  especially  at  a  bar,  which, 
even  from  days  before  the  Revolution,  has  been  so  emi- 
nent as  that  of  the  county  of  Worcester.  But  Mr. 
Bailey  had  acquired  high  rank  among  his  brethren,  and 
by  courteous  manners,  careful  learning,  sound  judgment, 
and  sterling  integrity,  had  secured  the  respect  of  the 
people  and  of  courts  and  juries. 

His  public  life  was  very  brief.  In  1856,  he  was 
elected  a  representative  in  the  Legislature  of  Massa- 


88  DEATH    OF    HON.    GOLDSMITH    F.    BAILEY. 

chusetts ;  and,  in  1858  and  1860,  was  a  member  of  the 
State  Senate.  In  this  new  field  of  labor  he  was  emi- 
nently successful ;  and,  in  his  second  year  in  the  Senate, 
it  may  be  fairly  said,  there  was  no  man  in  the  body  in 
whom  his  colleagues  or  the  public  reposed  more  con- 
fidence. 

The  ability  and  fidelity  with  which  he  discharged 
these  high  duties  attracted  the  attention  and  won  the 
regard  of  the  people  of  his  district ;  and  in  November, 
1860,  in  a  canvass  warmly  contested  by  an  able  and 
popular  man,  he  was  elected  to  this  House. 

He  took  his  seat  at  the  extra  session  in  July.  But 
over  his  new  and  expanded  horizon  the  night  was 
already  shutting  down.  The  hand  of  death  was  laid 
visibly  upon  him.  You  could  hear  the  very  rustling  of 
his  wings. 

He  came  back  in  December  apparently  a  little  better. 
It  was  but  the  glow  of  sunset,  —  the  flickering  of  the 
flame  before  it  goes  out.  He  lost  strength  from  day  to 
day,  and  at  last  went  home  to  die,  —  to  realize  the 
Spanish  benediction,  "  May  you  die  among  your  kin- 
dred ! "  and,  what  is  of  infinitely  greater  moment,  the 
divine  benediction,  "  Blessed  are  the  dead  who  die  in 
the  Lord." 

To  our  narrow  vision,  Mr.  Speaker,  such  a  life 
seems  imperfect,  such  a  death  premature,  —  to  wrestle 
with  adverse  fortune,  as  Jacob  with  the  angel,  until 
you  wrest  from  it  its  blessing;  to  struggle  through 
youth  and  early  manhood ;  to  reach  the  threshold  of 
mature  life,  of  usefulness,  and  of  honor,  and  to  sink 
weary  and  exhausted  before  the  open  'door. 


DEATH    OF    HON.    GOLDSMITH    F.    BAILEY.  89 

It  is  a  narrow  view,  Mr.  Speaker,  which  a  serene 
trust  in  God  and  in  his  infinite  wisdom  and  infinite  good- 
ness at  once  dispels.  We  wipe  the  mist  from  our  eyes, 
and  see  that  all  is  well.  In  the  presence  and  with  the 
consciousness  of  an  immortal  life,  what  matters  it 
whether  much  or  little  be  spent  this  side  the  veil, 
provided,  as  with  our  departed  brother,  it  is  well 
spent  1 

Mr.  Speaker,  death  is  busy  everywhere  around  us. 
The  accomplished  jurist,  the  pure  patriot,  the  states- 
man wise  and  good,  passes  away  in  the  sabbath  stillness.* 
Amid  the  thunders  of  artillery  rocking  like  a  cradle 
land  and  sea,  amid  fire  and  smoke,  the  shrieks  of  the 
wounded,  the  groans  of  the  dying,  the  wail  of  defeat, 
and  the  shouts  of  triumph,  the  angel-reapers  are  gar- 
nering in  fields  seemingly  not  white  for  the  harvest. 
The  flower  of  our  youth,  the  beauty  of  our  Israel,  is 
slain  in  our  high  places.  The  victories  in  this  holy 
struggle  for  national  life  and  "liberty  in  law"  are 
sealed  with  our  most  precious  blood.  Yet  in  this  hour 
of  chastened  triumph,  of  mingled  joy  and  sadness,  that 
tranquil  death  in  a  far-off  New-England  home  comes 
very  nigh  to  us  with  its  solemn,  I  trust  not  unheeded 
warning,  "  Be  ye  also  ready." 

I  offer  the  following  resolutions:  — 

Eesolved,  That  the  House  has  heard  with  profound  sorrow  the 
announcement  of  the  death  of  Hon.  Goldsmith  F.  Bailey,  a  member 
of  this  House  from  the  Ninth  Congressional  District  of  the  State  of 
Massachusetts. 

*  Samuel  F.  Vinton. 
12 


90  DEATH    OF   HON.    GOLDSMITH    F.    BAILEY. 

Resolved,  That  this  House  tenders  to  the  widow  and  relatives  of 
the  deceased  the  expression  of  its  deep  sympathy  in  this  afflicting 
bereavement. 

Resolved,  That  the  Clerk  of  this  House  communicate  to  the  widow 
of  .the  deceased  a  copy  of  these  resolutions. 

Resolved  (as  a  further  mark  of  respect),  That  a  copy  of  these 
resolutions  be  communicated  to  the  Senate,  and  that  the  House  do 
now  adjourn. 


91 


CASE    OF   THE    "TRENT." 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  JAN.  7,  1862. 

I  DESIRE  to  say  a  word  upon  the  subject  to  which 
the  motion*  refers. 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  surrender  is  made,  the  thing  done. 
In  the  presence  of  great  duties,  we  have  no  time  for 
the  luxury  of  grief.  Complaint  of  the  Government 
would  be  useless,  if  not  groundless.  It  was  too  much 
to  ask  of  it  to  take  another  war  on  its  hands.  Pos- 
sibly the  elaborate  and  ingenious  argument  of  the 
Secretary  might  have  been  spared.  The  matter  was 
in  a  nutshell;  the  answer,  in  a  word:  "Take  them. 
There  are  duties  Ijing  nearer  to  us.  We  can  wait." 

But  we  are  not  called  upon,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  say 
that  the  demand  of  England  was  manly  or  just.  It  was 
unmanly  and  unjust.  It  was  a  demand,  which,  in  view 
of  her  history,  of  the  rights  she  had  always  claimed 
and  used  as  a  belligerent  power,  of  the  principles  which 
her  greatest  of  jurists,  Lord  Stowell,  had  embedded 
in  the  law  of  nations,  England  was  fairly  estopped 
to  make.  But  I  rely  on  no  estoppel:  I  pause  not  to 
inquire  as  to  the  consistency  of  England,  or  how  far 
she  is  influenced  by  the  consideration  that  she  is  now  a 

*  The  motion  to  refer  the  message  of  the  President,  transmitting  the  correspondence 
on  this  case,  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs. 


92  CASE   OF   THE    TRENT. 

neutral  power,  and  we  are  in  a  struggle  for  national 
life ;  or  to  express  surprise  that  her  belligerent  doc- 
trines, so  suddenly  become  obsolete,  have  been  swept 
as  cobwebs  from  her  path.  This  is  a  question  of  legal 
right;  and,  as  such,  I  will  look  it  in  the  face.  We 
may  feel  compelled  to  make  concessions :  we  will  ask 
none.  The  claim  of  England  is  that  the  "  Trent "  was 
pursuing  a  lawful  and  innocent  voyage,  and  that  the 
taking  from  her  of  Messrs.  Mason  and  Slidell  was  an 
affront  to  the  British  flag  and  a  violation  of  interna- 
tional law. 

The  legal  questions  involved  are  simple,  and  may 
be  briefly  and  plainly  stated. 

Had  we  the  right  of  visitation  and  search1?  There 
is  no  controversy  on  this  point.  Nothing  is  better 
settled  in  the  law  of  nations  than  the  right  of  a  belli- 
gerent to  visit  and  search  the  vessel  of  a  neutral  for 
contraband  of  war,  or  to  ascertain  if  she  is  employed 
in  the  transportation  of  military  persons  or  despatches 
of  the  enemy.  Was  the  "  Trent "  so  employed  ?  How  is 
that  question  to  be  settled  1  The  obious  answer  is  by 
the  existing  law  of  nations.  The  question  is,  not  what 
rule  ought  now  to  be  adopted,  but  what  is  the  existing 
rule  ^  New  rules  are  guides  for  future  action,  not 
tests  of  the  past.  The  common  law  of  nations,  like 
that  of  England  and  of  this  country,  is,  to  a  large  extent, 
a  law  of  precedents.  These  precedents  are,  however, 
of  weight  and  authority  for  the  principles  involved  in 
their  determination,  and  not  merely  in  cases  where  all 
the  facts  are  identical.  The  whole  body  of  the  common 
law  is  the  result  of  this  distinction.  It  could  not 


CASE    OF   THE    TRENT.  93 

otherwise  be  a  science  or  intelligent  rule  of  action. 
The  province  of  courts,  of  jurists,  and  of  statesmen,  is 
to  apply  settled  principles  to  new  combinations  of  facts. 
From  the  mass  of  authorities  let  us  extract  the  prin- 
ciples applicable  to  the  case. 

1.  The  fair  result  of  the  authorities,  and  especially 
of  the  English  authorities,  is  that  the  carrying  of  the 
despatches  of  a  belligerent  is  a  violation  of  neutrality, 
the  penalty  of  which  is  not  only  the  seizure  of  the  de- 
spatches, but  the  seizure  and  confiscation  of  the  vehicle 
which  carries  them,  if  the  carriage  be  with  the  know- 
ledge or  complicity  of  the  owner  or  master. 

2.  The  rule  includes  the  official  despatches  of  the 
enemy,  whether  relating  to  civil  or  military  affairs. 

3.  The  form  in  which  the  despatches  are  borne  is 
immaterial.     They  may  be  oral  as  well  as  written,  em- 
bodied as  well  as  upon  parchment.    The  mischief  is  the 
same.     The  reason  of  the  rule  covers  the  substance, 
which  is  the  thing  sent. 

4.  If  the  neutral  is  serving  the  belligerent,  doing  his 
work,  the  fact  that  the  despatches,  living  or  written, 
were  taken  at  a  neutral  port,  and  that,  at  the  time  of 
the  seizure,  the  vessel  was  going  from  one  neutral  port 
to  another,  is  material  only  upon  the  question*of  the  for- 
feiture of  the  vessel,  and  as  tending  to  show  that  the 
despatches  were  taken  without  the  privity  of  master 
or  owner.     The  result  to  be  effected  —  the  aid  to  the 
one  belligerent,  and  the  injury  to  the  other  —  is  the 
same.      The  sanction  of  the  exception  would  be  the 
constant  evasion,  the  practical  suspension,  of  the  rule 
itself. 


94  CASE    OF    THE    TRENT. 

The  substance  of  the  whole  matter  is  this :  By  carry- 
ing the  despatches  of  the  enemy,  in  whatever  form 
embodied,  the  greatest  possible  service  may  be  done 
to  one  belligerent,  and  the  greatest  possible  injury  to 
another. 

If,  then,  the  "  Trent "  had  been  brought  in  for  adju- 
dication, and  had  been  condemned,  England  could  not 
have  said,  that,  as  matter  of  law,  the  condemnation  was 
wrong.  She  might  and  would  have  said,  that,  as  mat- 
ter of  courtesy,  our  officers  should  have  foreborne  the 
exercise  of  their  extreme  right,  and  have  suffered  the 
vessel,  the  other  passengers  and  cargo,  to  proceed  on 
the  voyage. 

We  might  well  have  said,  that,  from  the  beginning,  it 
had  been  the  policy  of  this  Government  to  enlarge  and 
strengthen  the  rights  of  neutrals ;  to  free  neutral  com- 
merce from  every  unnecessary  restraint ;  that  especially 
had  this  been  the  case  with  respect  to  the  treating  of 
persons  as  within  the  rule  of  contraband  of  war.  We 
might  have  shown  with  what  anxiety  we  had  sought  to 
limit  the  rule  on  this  point  "  to  soldiers  in  the  actual  ser- 
vice of  the  enemy  ;  "  that  in  our  treaties  with  France,  in 

our  treaties  with  Mexico  and  the  South- American  States, 

i 

we  had  inserted  this  important  exception  to,  and  limita- 
tion of,  the  rule  of  international  law ;  in  all  cases,  how- 
ever, providing  that  the  limitation  should  not  extend  to 
those  nations  with  which  we  had  no  such  treaty ;  of  which 
England  was  one.  We  might  have  well  said,  that  the 
propriety  of  this  limitation  is  every  day  becoming  more 
apparent ;  that  the  introduction  of  steam  into  naviga- 
tion had  brought  nations  into  closer  proximity,  and  into 


CASE   OF   THE   TRENT.  95 

more  frequent  and  regular  intercourse  ;  that  the  wants 
of  modern  commerce  and  modern  culture  had  made 
mail-routes  as  necessary  on  the  sea  as  on  the  land ;  and 
that  we  ought  to  remove  all  obstructions  from  the  path- 
way of  these  messengers  of  civilization  and  of  peace. 
We  might  have  said,  We  will  gladly  assent  to  such  mo- 
difications of  the  law  of  nations  as  shall  meet  and  satisfy 
these  wants ;  the  modifications  most  clearly  demanded 
being,  that  no  persons  shall  be  deemed  within  the  prin- 
ciple of  contraband  of  war  but  soldiers  in  service  ;  and 
that,  when  hostile  despatches  are  taken  from  neutral 
mail-steamers,  the  claims  of  humanity  and  the  interests 
of  the  commercial  world  shall  be  respected,  and  the 
vessel  be  permitted  to  proceed  on  its  voyage  without 
unnecessary  delay,  —  the  legality  of  the  seizure  being 
determined  without  the  presence  of  the  ship. 

As  to  this  case,  we  stand  upon  the  existing  law  ;  we 
feel  ourselves  to  be  justified  by  the  law  as  written. 
If  you  think  otherwise,  we  will,  in  deference  to  the 
excellent  suggestion  made  by  the  British  Government  to 
the  Paris  Congress  of  1856,  have  "  recourse  to  the 
offices  of  a  friendly  power."  We  will  submit  the  whole 
matter  to  arbitration,  and  abide  the  result. 

But  it  is  said,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  omission  to  bring 
in  the  vessel  for  adjudication  rendered  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding void  ab  initio.  A  word  upon  this  point.  There 
is  no  just  ground  for  complaint  of  the  proceedings,  so 
far  as  they  went.  The  complaint  is,  not  of  what  was 
done,  but  what  was  left  undone.  Two  questions  arise 
here  :  First,  was  there  a  sufficient  legal  reason  for  not 
bringing  in  the  vessel  ?  Secondly,  what,  in  the  ab- 


96  CASE   OF   THE    TRENT. 

sence  of  such  legal  reason,  is  the  effect  of  the  omis- 
sion? 

1.  Was  there  a  sufficient  reason  for  not  bringing  in 

the  "  Trent "  ? 

Some  things  are  plain.  It  is  plain  that  Capt.  Wilkes 
understood  that  the  "  Trent "  was  lawful  prize,  and 
that  his  course  was  a  proceeding  in  the  capture  of 
prize  of  war.  It  is  plain  also  that  he  determined  to 
waive  his  right  to  take  in  the  vessel  as  prize,  and  to  suffer 
her  to  proceed  on  her  voyage.  These  facts  are  of  the 
highest  importance.  The  difference  between  the  board- 
ing of  a  vessel  by  a  boat's  crew,  and  taking  from  her 
men  or  goods,  —  the  act  constituting  no  part  of  a  prize 
proceeding,  —  and  the  release  of  a  prize  by  a  captor 
in  the  exercise  of  his  discretion,  and  for  reasons  of 
necessity  or  of  humanity,  is  plain  and  vital :  neither 
ingenuity  nor  dulness  can  confound  them.  The  whole 
proceedings  of  Capt.  Wilkes  were  characterized  by  the 
utmost  good  faith.  Had  he  a  legal  excuse  for  not 
bringing  in  the  vessel  for  adjudication  1  We  do  not 
expect  from  a  sailor,  however  gallant  and  accomplished, 
the  precision  of  special  pleading.  He  gives  as  the 
first  reason  the  want  of  a  sufficient  prize-crew,  in  con- 
sequence of  his  being  so  reduced  in  officers  and  men. 
Was  that  the  fact "?  It  will,  I  have  no  doubt,  be  found 
to  be  so.  We  have  now  the  statement  of  an  officer  and 
a  gentleman,  and  nothing  to  control  it.  If  such  was 
the  fact,  and  Capt.  Wilkes  acted  upon  it,  he  was  justi- 
fied in  law  for  not  bringing  the  "  Trent"  in.  It  is  im- 
material that  motives  of  humanity  concurred  with  and 
fortified  that  conclusion.  The  heart  responded  to  the 


CASE    OF   THE    TRENT.  97 

head.  It  neither  assumed  its  prerogative  nor1  questioned 
it.  It  only  said,  "Amen."  If  the  legal  excuse  existed 
and  was  acted  upon,  it  was  enough;  and  the  ground 
upon  which  the  Crown  advisers  are  reported  to  have 
proceeded  falls  from  under  them. 

2.  But  suppose  there  was  error  in  not  bringing  in 
the  vessel :  what  is  the  result  ?  It  is,  that  the  questions 
at  issue  must  be  settled  by  the  sovereigns  of  the  parties 
without  the  aid  of  a  prize-court.  The  prize-court  is 
the  inquest  of  the  sovereign  of  the  captor,  and  for  his 
protection.  It  settles  the  question  of  seizure,  so  far  as 
the  rights  of  property  are  concerned.  It  does  not  set- 
tle the  question  of  right  as  between  the  sovereigns.  In 
this  case,  the  question  would  have  been  as  to  the  for- 
feiture of  the  vessel :  the  persons  or  despatches  would 
not  have  been  directly  involved ;  the  judgment  would 
not  have  operated  upon  them.  If  the  vessel  had  been 
brought  in  and  condemned  by  a  court  of  admiralty,  and 
England  had  believed  that  the  judgment  of  the  court 
was  against  the  law  of  nations,  she  would  not  have 
acquiesced ;  she  would  not  have  been  bound  to  ac- 
quiesce. The  same  controversy  would  have  opened  ; 
the  same  questions  to  be  settled  as  now. — Pinkmys 
Statement  of  the  Law  in  the  Case  of  the  "  Betsey" 
Wheaton's  Memoirs  of  Pinkney,  p.  199. 

Those  questions  would  have  been,  Had  we  the  right 
of  search  \  was  it  fairly  exercised  \  were  the  persons 
taken  within  the  prohibition  \  and  to  every  one  of  these 
questions  the  law  of  nations  would  have  answered  in 
the  affirmative ;  and,  if  England  had  consulted  her 
oracles,  she  would  have  heard  the  same  response.  It 

13 


98  CASE    OF    THE    TRENT. 

is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  Lord  Stowell  would  have 
condemned  the  "  Trent "  on  the  double  ground  of  carry- 
ing despatches  of  the  enemy  and  of  resistance  to 
search. 

Mr.  Speaker,  when  this  whole  matter  shall  have 
been  calmly  and  thoroughly  considered  and  weighed, 
the  judgment  of  the  civilized  world  will  be,  or  should  be, 
with  us.  We  have  the  first  impression,  and  not  the 
sober  second  thought.  The  question  which  has  been 
considered  is,  rather  what  the  law  should  be  made  to  be, 
than  what  it  is.  When  the  matter  is  more  carefully 
weighed,  it  will  be  seen  and  felt  that  no  wrong  was  done 
to  England  ;  that  there  was  no  wrong  in  the  forbear- 
ance to  exercise  an  extreme  right ;  no  insult,  for  none 
was  intended ;  that  our  "  failing,"  if  any,  "  leaned  to 
virtue's  side,"  was  a  relaxation  of  the  iron  rigor  of  law 
from  motives  of  humanity  and  Christian  courtesy  ;  that, 
on  the  other  hand,  England  has  done  to  us  a  great  wrong 
in  availing  herself  of  our  moment  of  weakness  to  make 
a  demand,  which,  accompanied  as  it  was  by  "  the  pomp 
and  circumstance  of  war,"  was  insolent  in  spirit,  unman- 
ly and  unjust.  It  was  indeed  courteous  in  language ; 
it  was  the  courtesy  of  Joab  to  Amasa  as  he  smote  him 
in  the  fifth  rib  :  "  Art  thou  in  health,  my  brother  1 " 
That  message  of  Lord  Russell  to  Lord  Lyons  which 
could  cross  the  Atlantic  would  not  have  had  projectile 
force  enough  to  have  passed  from  Dover  to  Calais. 

Such  is  the  penalty  of  weakness,  even  temporary 
weakness. 

Upon  the  grounds  upon  which  this  surrender  has  been 
made,  nothing  is  gained  for  the  cause  of  neutral  rights. 


CASE    OF    THE   TRENT.  99 

The  lesson  taught  us  by  this  case  is,  that  not  only  may 
every  mail  steamer  of  a  neutral  be  seized,  and  searched 
for  contraband  of  war  or  despatches  of  the  enemy,  but 
that  her  voyage  may  and  must  be  broken  up,  and  the 
vessel  brought  in  for  adjudication.  Neutral  commerce 
may  well  pray  relief  from  her  friends. 

But  will  England  feel  herself  bound  by  the  precedent 
such  as  it  is  ?  So  long  as  it  is  convenient,  —  not  a  mo- 
ment longer.  Her  standard  of  right  has  been,  is,  and 
will  be,  the  maritime  power  and  interests  of  England. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  "  law  of  nature  and  of"  nations 
that  will  stand  in  the  way  of  her  imperious  will. 


100 


SPEECH  AT  THE  MASS   MEETING   FOR   RECRUITING, 
ON  BOSTON  COMMON. 


AUGUST  27,  1862. 


Mr.  PRESIDENT  AND  FELLOW-CITIZENS, — If  you  could 
analyze  the  feelings  of  a  candle  upon  being  lit  up  just 
as  the  sun  was  going  down,  you  would  appreciate  my 
feelings  in  succeeding  New  England's  most  accomplished 
orator.*  But  you  neither  expect,  nor  would  you  tolerate, 
an  elaborate  speech.  Indeed,  if  I  consulted  my  own 
heart,  my  lips  would  be  sealed. 

When  the  beauty  of  our  Israel  is  slain  on  her  high 
places ;  when  the  sons  of  our  love  are  perishing  in  loath- 
some dungeons ;  when  armed  treason  is  battering  the 
gates  of  the  capital ;  when  the  nation  itself  is  struggling, 
gasping,  for  the  breath  of  its  life ;  rhetoric,  logic,  elo- 
quence even,  seem  mean  and  paltry.  Nothing,  indeed, 
is  eloquent  but  the  roar  of  the  cannon  and  the  crack 
of  the  rifle,  nothing  logical  but  the  sword  and  the 
bayonet. 

The  issues  before  the  country  are  of  life  or  death, 
glory  or  shame,  order  or  anarchy,  union  or  chaos,  a 
nation  or  a  Mexico.  And,  in  this  hour  of  awful  peril, 
there  is  for  us  but  one  hope,  one  way  of  salvation  ;  and 


*  Mr.  Everett. 


MASS    MEETING    FOR   RECRUITING.  101 

that  is  to  subdue  armed  rebellion  by  arms,  —  to  over- 
whelm it  by  superior  force  on  the  field  of  battle. 

Processions  and  banners,  touching  allusions  to  Bunker 
Hill  and  Faneuil  Hall,  sentimental  resolutions,  procla- 
mations beginning  and  ending  in  words,  bills  of  confis- 
cation and  emancipation,  after  much  travail  utterly  still 
born,  won't  do  the  work.  If  you  meian^tts'  save  ihe  coun- 
try, you  have  got  to  fight  for  it/  /JHie  irjegf o^etfnjt  ftp  it 
for  you ;  Providence  won't  do  it  for  you,  unless  you  put 
your  shoulders  to  the  wheel.  You  have  got  to  work 
out  your  own  salvation ;  in  this  case,  without  "  fear  or 
trembling." 

The  only  alternative  is  to  sue  for  peace,  and  submit 
to  dissolution  ;  to  betray  the  sublime  trust  committed  to 
us  by  God  and  our  fathers,  and  to  rot  into  dishonored 
graves  at  home. 

If  this  be  so,  men  of  Boston,  patriotic,  self-sacri- 
ficing men,  capable  of  living  and  dying  for  your 
country,  what  wait  you  for  1  The  path  of  duty  lies 
open  before  you.  Interest,  duty,  honor,  patriotism,  the 
sense  of  manhood,  all  point  one  way :  that  way  leads 
to  struggle  and  to  victory,  and,  through  victory,  to 
union  and  peace.  Controversy  as  to  the  causes  of  the 
war  is  useless  now.  Grumbling,  carping  criticism  of 
the  past  is  mean  and  disloyal  now.  Side-issues,  parti- 
san or  philanthropic,  are  moral  treason  now.  They 
weaken  and  divide  us  in  a  struggle  that  requires  all 
our  wisdom,  all  our  energy,  all  our  strength,  directed 
and  converged  to  the  single  work  and  duty  of  subduing 
the  foe  in  arms.  Not  a  man,  not  a  dollar,  not  a  thought, 
can  be  wasted  on  any  other  issue.  Now  or  never  is  the 


102  MASS    MEETING    FOR   RECRUITING. 

salvation  of  the  country  possible.  Hard  words  won't 
do  it ;  threats  and  curses  won't  do  it ;  violence  won't  do 
it.  Nothing  will  do  it  but  superior  physical  force  in  the 
field,  wielded  with  an  energy  all  the  more  terrible  be- 
cause it  is  calm,  and  knows  how  to  obey  as  well  as  to 

command- 

Fellow-citizens, :  we  '-h'aye  cause  for  anxiety,  —  none 
for  .despairs,  •  «'We  haye;under-estimated  the  strength  and 
resources  of  our  opponents.  We  have  greatly  under- 
estimated our  own  strength  and  resources.  Rebellion 
has,  we  may  believe,  made  its  crowning  effort :  its 
bucket  has  touched  bottom.  The  water  in  our  well  is 
yet  deep.  We  can  maintain  a  million  men  in  the 
field ;  and,  on  the  sea,  five  hundred  ships  of  war.  With 
these,  twenty  millions  of  intelligent,  united,  devoted 
people  can  vindicate  the  integrity  of  the  nation,  and  defy 
a  world  in  arms. 

If  you  would  avoid  intervention  by  foreign  powers, 
the  only  way  is  to  be  prepared  for  it.  Put  your  million 
of  men  into  the  field,  and  your  five  hundred  ships  upon 
your  seas  and  rivers.  Bear  up  the  old  flag,  resolved  to 
live  under  it,  to  conquer  with  it,  or  die  beneath  its  folds. 
In  an  hour  of  your  weakness,  other  nations  may  inter- 
vene; never,  if  you  put  forth  your  real  strength, — 
never. 

Would  you  consent  to  separation,  to  give  up  this  glo- 
rious Union  of  your  fathers,  where  will  you  draw  the 
line  1  Are  the  Gulf  States  only  to  be  severed  ?  Your 
enemy  will  not  consent  to  that  division.  Will  you  give 
up  the  Border  States "?  The  Border  States  will  not  go. 
Let  me  say  in  the  face  of  the  men  of  Boston,  that  a 


MASS    MEETING    FOR   RECRUITING.  103 

nobler,  truer,  more  patriotic  set  of  men,  the  sun  does 
not  shine  upon,  than  the  Union  men  of  the  Border 
States.  I  feel  that  I  know  them ;  and  I  tell  you,  they 
will  not  go.  If  finally  driven  from  you,  no  man  can 
say  how  much  of  the  great  West  would  go  with  them, 
or  where  the  ultimate  line  of  division  would  fall. 

[Mr.  Thomas  here  enlarged  upon  the  geographical 
and  commercial  ties  which  bind  the  West  to  the  South, 
and  said  there  is  no  safety  for  us  but  in  clinging  to  the 
Union  as  it  was  and  the  Constitution  as  it  is.] 

Let  us  be  manly,  be  just,  be  tolerant.  It  is  the  easi- 
est thing  in  the  world  to  find  fault,  but  not  the  wisest 
thing.  In  conducting  war  upon  so  vast  a  scale,  and 
requiring  so  many  and  varied  agencies,  mistakes  and 
blunders  will  be  made.  The  race  is  not  always  to  the 
swift,  nor  the  battle  to  the  strong.  We  have  a  great 
and  powerful  people,  and  at  their  head  an  upright,  con- 
scientious, conservative  Chief  Magistrate.  Let  us  work, 
and  not  grumble ;  let  us  labor,  and  not  faint. 


104 


THE   ARMY   OF   THE   RESERVE. 


ADDRESS   BEFORE  THE  PHI   BETA  KAPPA  SOCIETY   OF  BOWDOIN 
COLLEGE,  AUGUST  7,   1862. 

Mr.  PRESIDENT  AND  GENTLEMEN,  —  Human  culture  in 
some  one  of  its  aspects  is  the  appropriate  theme  of  the 
occasion.  In  selecting  the  speaker  from  the  field  of 
active  and  busy  life,  you  did  not  require  nor  look  for  an 
elaborate  discussion  of  its  philosophy.  The  fair  question 
put  to  us,  wrestlers  on  the  dusty  arena,  is  this  :  Looking 
at  the  subject  from  your  stand-point,  have  you  any  prac- 
tical suggestions  to  make  that  may  aid  us  in  this  noblest 
of  works,  —  the  building-up  not  only  of  the  living  battle- 
ments of  the  State,  but  of  the  beings  that  we  are,  and 
are  to  be  \ 

One  of  the  most  important  matters  in  modern  war- 
fare is  the  composition  of  the  army  of  the  reserve. 
It  is  relied  upon  to  supply  fresh  forces  at  the  instant 
of  need,  to  support  points  that  are  shaken,  to  be  ready 
to  act  at  decisive  moments.  It  should  be  composed  of 
select  troops,  well  appointed,  thoroughly  trained,  under 
the  eye  of  a  cool,  sagacious,  and  resolute  commander. 
The  need  of  such  reserved  force  has  been  painfully 
illustrated  in  this  war  for  national  life.  In  the  most  im- 
portant junctures,  we  have  failed  to  win  victory  or  secure 
its  fruits  from  the  lack  of  an  army  in  reserve. 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.          105 

No  better  example  of  such  a  reserve  can  be  found 
than  the  Imperial  Guard  of  Napoleon,  nor  of  its  use 
than  on  the  field  of  Austerlitz. 

Our  life  is  a  campaign  and  a  warfare.  It  has  its  deci- 
sive moments,  whose  issues  for  good  or  evil,  for  victory 
or  defeat,  must  depend  on  our  reserved  power.  On  the 
field  of  letters,  on  the  broader  field  of  human  life,  he 
only  organizes  victory,  and  commands  success,  behind 
whose  van  and  corps  of  battle  is  heard  the  steady  tramp 
of  the  army  of  the  reserve. 

To  some  illustrations  of  this  thought  I  give  the  hour 
your  kindness  has  assigned  to  me. 

It  is  a  stern  lesson,  and  hard  to  be  learned,  that  though 
the  ordinary  duties  of  life  require  large  power,  intel- 
lectual and  moral,  the  supply  must  constantly  exceed  the 
immediate  demand.  It  is  a  hard  lesson,  but  a  necessary 
one. 

Life  is  not  all  routine.  It  has  its  great  temptations, 
its  golden  opportunities.  To  withstand  the  one,  to  seize 
the  other,  we  must  organize  and  maintain  our  spiritual 
army  of  the  reserve.  There  is  no  hope  of  large 
achievement,  or  of  safety  even,  in  impressing  forces  or 
foraging  for  supplies  on  the  line  of  march,  much  less  on 
the  eve  of  battle.  In  youth  for  manhood,  in  summer  for 
winter,  in  sunshine  for  storm,  in  peace  for  war,  in  the 
actual  for  the  possible,  the  law  of  Providence  and  fore- 
sight is  universal. 

The  rules  for  the  composition  of  the  spiritual  reserve 
are  simple,  whatever  of  difficulty  there  may  be  in  their 
just  application.  Faculties  trained  by  patient,  thorough, 
protracted  discipline ;  supplies  carefully  garnered,  and 

14 


106  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

then  so  thoroughly  digested  that  they  will  enter  into  the 
bone  and  muscle  of  the  mind,  and  become  power ;  this 
was  what  Lord  Bacon  meant  by  saying  knowledge  was 
power. 

The  nucleus  is  to  be  formed  before  the  campaign  of 
active  life  opens ;  after  that,  growing  rigor  of  discipline 
and  daily  accessions  of  strength. 

The  magnitude  and  extent  of  the  reserve  are  to  be 
measured,  not  by  the  wants  of  to-day  or  of  the  next  cam- 
paign, but  by  the  possible  exigencies  of  human  life,  —  a 
life  whose  horizon  is  ever  lifting  up,  whose  possibilities 
of  to-day  are  the  necessities  of  to-morrow. 

And  though  there  must  be  limitation,  and  exclusion 
even,  no  more  forces  than  can  be  well  kept  up  and  main- 
tamed,  no  half-grown  conscripts,  none  maimed  or  blind, 
diseased  or  leprous,  yet  the  recruiting-office  is  never 
closed;  for  the  campaign  is  never  ended. 

We  have  thrift  and  providence  ;  but  they  take  a  mate- 
rial direction.  We  save  for  the  dark  and  rainy  day ;  but 
we  save  money  and  houses  and  lands.  Intellectually,  we 
live  from  hand  to  mouth.  We  begin  the  life  of  action 
before  the  life  of  study.  The  result  is,  that,  with  most 
of  us,  the  life  of  patient  study  and  quiet  thought  never 
begins.  "  Quid  enim  aut  didicimus  aut  scire  potuimus 
qui  ante  ad  agendum  quam  ad  cognescendum  venimus." 

Getting  knowledge  for  immediate  use,  cramming  for 
the  occasion,  we  limit  ourselves  to  the  narrowest  range 
of  the  useful  and  practical :  meaning,  by  useful,  value  in 
the  shambles  of  the  market ;  and  by  practical,  dexterity 
in  the  use  of  tools,  without  any  perception  of  the  princi- 
ples which  underlie  them.  We  find,  often  too  late  except 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  107 

as  a  warning  to  others,  that  there  is  nothing  hi  this  world 
half  so  practical  or  half  so  economical  as  accurate 
knowledge,  patient  labor,  thorough  discipline,  the  care- 
ful composition,  the  constant  training,  of  the  army  of  the 
reserve. 

And  first  we  may  remark,  that  this  reserved  power  is 
necessary  to  the  thorough  possession  of  ourselves.  It 
is  true,  abstractly,  that  a  man  owns  himself,  his  powers 
and  faculties ;  but,  in  ninety-nine  cases  in  an  hundred, 
he  never  comes  into  the  quiet  enjoyment  of  his  estate. 
With  some  opportunities  for  observing  men  in  intel- 
lectual conflict,  I  venture  to  say  there  is  no  respect  in 
which  the  difference  is  so  marked  as  in  the  extent 
to  which  they  possess  themselves,  their  own  powers  and 
resources.  We  hear  much  of  self-culture  and  self-devel- 
opment ;  and  it  is  well.  All  true  culture  is  self-culture ; 
all  true  development  is  self-development.  We  hear 
far  less  than  we  ought  of  the  thorough  possession  of  a 
man's  self;  of  spiritual  forces  so  orderly  disposed,  so 
loyal,  so  trained  to  prompt  obedience  and  action,  that 
they  will  rally,  and  form  into  line  for  service,  at  the  first 
tap  of  the  drum. 

There  are  men,  with  all  the  learning  of  the  schools, 
whose  learning  is  but  a  clog  and  hinderance :  their  learn- 
ing masters  them,  not  they  their  learning  ;  creating  such 
a  pressure  on  the  brain,  that  it  has  no  free,  natural  play 
and  motion ;  ever  coming  in  at  the  wrong  time,  or  coming 
in  too  late ;  like  the  baggage  of  an  eastern  army,  the 
great  impediment  to  the  march ;  or  rather  like  the  undis- 
ciplined hordes  of  nations  that  followed  Xerxes  from 
Asia  to  the  plains  of  Doriscus,  and  from  Doriscus  to 


108  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

Thermopylae.  Better,  infinitely  better,  one  well-trained 
Spartan  band. 

Necessary  to  this  self-possession  are  calmness,  —  the 
calmness  which  springs  only  from  the  consciousness  of 
strength  in  reserve,  of  measured  strength,  of  power  to 
strike  the  needed  blow  at  the  decisive  moment ;  the 
orderly  disposition  of  our  forces,  a  place  for  every  thing, 
and  every  thing  in  its  place  ;  the  military  eye  which 
surveys  the  whole  field  of  action,  sees  where  the  fight 
will  be  thickest  and  hardest,  and  the  forces  needed ;  and, 
rarest  of  powers,  the  power  to  refrain,  to  withhold  your 
fire;  to  sit  still  when  there  is  no  occasion  to  be  on 
your  feet ;  the  power  and  gift  of  silence,  the  power  to  say 
nothing  when  you  have  nothing  to  say,  or  nothing  that 
had  not  better  be  unsaid ;  the  power  of  masterly  inac- 
tivity, the  effective  grace  of  repose. 

Instead  of  schools  to  teach  us  how  to  talk,  we  want 
schools  to  teach  us  how  to  be  silent ;  sanitary  clubs  and 
commissions,  whose  end  and  ami  shall  be  to  prevent  the 
spread  of  this  insandbile  cacoethes  loquendi. 

In  this  power  of  self-mastery  is  wrapped  the  faculty  and 
grace  and  liberty  of  obedience  ;  the  power  to  recognize  the 
presence  of  law,  and  to  bend  to  it ;  to  mark  its  bounds, 
and  keep  within  them.  "  Qui  nescit  ignorare  ignorat 
scire."  The  rebellious  is  never  the  truly  wise  spirit.  It 
is  for  ever  breaking  and  bruising  itself  against  the  walls 
of  its  fancied  prison-house.  Into  the  obedient,  ever  open, 
and  receptive  spirit,  wisdom  loves  to  come  and  take  up 
her  abode. 

He  only  well  commands  who  knows  to  serve  well,  to 
obey  promptly,  gracefully,  with  thorough  loyalty  of  mind 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  109 

and  heart ;  the  rarest  of  virtues,  not  the  peculiar  vir- 
tue of  our  countrymen,  very  apt  to  confound  the  absence 
of  wholesome  restraint  with  liberty ;  whereas  true  free- 
dom is  for  the  loyal  soul,  —  liberty  in  law.  The  loyal 
spirit  feels  restraint  as  a  woman  wears  the  bracelet  on 
her  white  arm ;  the  rebel  spirit,  as  the  culprit  the  hand- 
cuffs on  his  galled  and  swollen  wrists. 

Again :  we  remark,  that  the  gathering  and  training  of 
this  army  of  the  reserve  is  the  easiest  and  cheapest  way 
of  conducting,  not  a  great  war  only,  but  the  campaign  of 
life. 

If  a  man  means  to  do  any  thing  in  this  world  to  win 
the  battle  of  life,  it  is  easier  to  be  than  to  seem.  In  the 
long-run,  reality  is  easier  than  sham,  wisdom  than  cun- 
ning, the  king's  highway  than  the  by-path  or  cross-cut. 
It  is  often  a  simpler  thing  to  acquire  strength  than  to 
conceal  the  lack  of  it.  Nothing  indeed  is  more  exhaust- 
ing than  the  shifts  to  cover  up  ignorance ;  the  craft 
required  to  seem  to  know  what  a  man  knows  not ;  the 
constant  caution,  lest  our  hollow  wares  should  come  to 
the  light ;  the  everlasting  repetition  "  of  wise  saws  and 
modern  instances  ; "  the  perpetual  dread  of  being  found 
out,  —  that  the  blown  bladder  may  be  pierced  by  some 
shaft  of  ridicule,  and  collapse  for  ever ;  to  say  nothing 
of  the  sinking  of  the  knees,  the  drooping  of  the  head, 
and  the  suffusion  of  blood  upon  the  brain. 

"  The  easiest  way,"  said  Sir  Boyle  Roche,  "  to  avoid 
danger,  is  to  meet  it  plump.  If  there  is  work  in  a  man's 
way,  the  best  possible  thing  that  can  be  done  is  to  go 
through  it,  and  on  a  man's  own  feet.  If  he  ride  round  it, 
nine  chances  out  of  ten  he  must  come  back,  and  walk 


110  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

straight  through  it."  It  often  costs  less  labor  to  do  work 
than  to  avoid  it.  Looking  at  a  specific  work  or  duty,  the 
simplest  and  best  thing  is  to  do  it,  and  do  it  well  if  you  can. 
Looking  at  life  as  a  whole,  the  truth  of  the  remark  be- 
comes yet  clearer.  The  doing  of  a  thing  well  not  only 
prevents  the  necessity  of  doing  it  again,  but  adds  to 
the  mind's  reserved  force,  and  renders  the  doing  of  the 
next  thing  easier  and  simpler.  The  resisting  of  one 
temptation  helps  to  disarm  the  power  of  the  second.  It 
is  not  long  before  labor  and  self-denial  become  positive 
enjoyments,  and  this  without  including  the  gaudia  cer- 
taminis,  or  the  highest  of  all  possible  satisfactions,  the 
purest  of  all  possible  delights,  —  the  consciousness  of 
duty  discharged. 

There  can  be  no  real  comfort  or  satisfaction  in  a  cam- 
paign in  which  you  have  to  rely  upon  raw,  undisciplined, 
not  to  say  mutinous  forces,  hastily  conscripted,  acting 
without  system  or  concert.  You  must  feel  there  is  a 
reserved  force,  well  appointed  and  trained,  upon  which 
you  can  draw  in  a  moment  of  need ;  whose  strength  you 
have  measured ;  and  which,  great  or  small,  is  reliable  and 
forthcoming. 

For  example :  A  young  man  is  to  study  law.  It  is  his 
business  to  understand  it,  arid  expound  it  to  others. 
Fidelity  to  his  clients  and  to  his  oath  of  office  requires 
this.  He  cannot,  with  decent  self-respect  or  as  an  honest 
man,  assume  to  say  what  the  law  is,  unless  he  has  dili- 
gently sought  to  know  what  it  is.  The  best,  the  cheapest 
thing  he  can  do  for  his  campaign  of  life,  is  to  bring  to 
the  study  of  the  law  a  mind  well  trained  and  enriched 
by  liberal  culture,  and  then  to  set  about  the  mastery  of 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  Ill 

its  principles.  This  training,  this  culture,  this  mastery 
of  principles,  will  make  up  a  glorious  army  of  the  reserve, 
the  worth  of  which,  his  life  long,  can  never  be  overrated ; 
the  want  of  which,  his  life  long,  can  never  be  supplied. 
Men  of  genius  and  untiring  industry  have,  indeed,  a  mea- 
sure of  success  without  them.  But  they,  of  all  men,  most 
deeply  regret  their  lack  ;  for  they,  of  all  men,  best  under- 
stand what  larger  victories  might  have  been  gracefully 
won  with  their  aid. 

How  common,  on  the  other  hand,  utter  failure  from 
the  want  of  this  reserved  power  ! 

A  young  man  of  fair  powers,  but  of  little  or  no  train- 
ing, is  anxious,  restless,  for  active  life.  He  would  enter 
upon  the  arena  not  only  unarmed,  but  incapaole  of  bear- 
ing the  weight  of  armor.  He  will  have  only  practical 
knowledge.  When  the  occasion  comes,  he  will  study  for 
it.  He  has  what  are  called  promising  qualities  ;  qualities 
which  seldom  or  never  pay.  He  has  a  certain  facility  of 
acquisition,  but  retains  nothing  save  the  confidence  which 
such  facility  is  apt  to  beget.  He  talks  fluently,  never 
hesitates  for  a  word,  and  seldom  gets  the  right  one.  He 
writes  with  perfect  ease,  and  therefore  never  writes  well. 
He  never  doubts,  and  therefore  never  understands. 

His  wished-for  opportunity  comes.  He  gets  up  a 
great  array  of  cheap  learning  and  cheaper  eloquence ; 
enters  upon  the  contest  with  drum  beating  and  banner 
flying.  Difficulties  spring  up  he  had  not  foreseen,  and 
he  has  no  reserved  force  to  meet  them.  He 'shrivels,  and 
his  client's  cause  with  him.  The  way  of  life  is  strewn 
with  sprouts  like  this.  "  Having  no  root  in  themselves, 
they  endure  but  for  a  time." 


112          THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

It  is  obvious  to  remark,  that,  in  life  as  in  war,  the  force 
which  may  suffice  for  ordinary  service  may  be  wholly 
inadequate  for  its  larger  exigencies,  for  its  decisive  mo- 
ments. In  almost  every  life,  those  decisive  moments 
come,  when  the  question  of  victory  or  defeat,  of  press- 
ing onward  or  lingering  behind,  must  depend  upon  our 
reserved  power  ;  when  the  door  of  opportunity  is  swung 
open,  and,  if  ready,  we  may  enter ;  if  not,  the  door  closes 
upon  us. 

Great  occasions  do  not  make  great  men.  (Of  this  the 
country  needs  no  proof.)  They  find  them  out,  and  give 
them  larger  development  and  a  broader  theatre  of  ac- 
tion. Great  men  make  great  occasions.  They  impart  to 
them  a  strength,  a  beauty,  a  glory  of  their  own.  They 
bathe  and  irradiate  them  with  the  light  of  their  ge- 
nius. They  give  to  them  of  their  own  immortality. 
Nay,  more :  great  men  are  great  occasions,  the  great 
events  of  history ;  not  merely  the  beacon-lights  on  the  line 
of  human  progress,  but  the  efficient  motive-powers,  the 
causce  causantes :  they  make,  they  constitute  history. 
Their  hands  bend  the  arch  of  the  new  heaven,  and  mould 
the  new  earth,  if  so  be  that  they  feel  the  Divine  Arm 
around  them  and  upholding  them,  and  do  the  work  of 
God  with  the  armor  of  God.  I  have  no  great  faith  in 
"  village  Hampdens  "  or  the  "  mute,  inglorious  Miltons  " 
that  rest  in  country  churchyards.  If  a  man  has  a  lever  to 
move  the  world,  the  chances  are  that  he  will  find  a  place 
to  put  it.  Genius  is  very  apt  to  crop  out :  so  men  of 
large  reserved  power  are  apt  to  find  occasions  to  bring 
it  into  action,  to  give  it  effective  utterance. 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  113 

The  introduction,  into  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  of  a  resolution  in  relation  to  the  sale  of  the 
public  lands,  was  not  a  great  occasion.  The  debate 
upon  it  for  some  days  dragged  heavily.  The  vast  re- 
served power  of  one  man  made  it  the  event  of  our 
history  for  a  generation. 

The  second  speech  of  Mr.  Hayne,  to  which  Mr.  Web- 
ster was  called  upon  to  reply,  was  able  and  brilliant,  its 
constitutional  argument  specious,  its  attack  upon  New 
England  and  upon  Mr.  Webster  sharp  even  to  bitterness. 
But  Mr.  Hayne  did  not  understand  this  matter  of  reserved 
power.  He  had  seen  Mr.  Webster's  van  and  corps  of 
battle,  but  had  not  heard  the  firm  and  measured  tread 
behind. 

It  was  a  decisive  moment  in  Mr.  Webster's  career. 
He  had  no  time  to  impress  new  forces  ;  scarcely  time  to 
burnish  his  armor.  All  eyes  were  turned  to  him.  Some 
of  his  best  friends  were  depressed  and  anxious.  He  was 
calm  as  a  summer's  morning ;  calm,  his  friends  thought, 
even  to  indifference.  But  his  calmness  was  the  repose 
of  conscious  power,  the  hush  of  nature  before  the  storm. 
He  had  measured  his  strength.  He  was  in  possession 
of  himself.  He  knew  the  composition  of  his  "  army  of 
the  reserve."  He  had  the  eye  of  a  great  commander, 
and  he  took  in  the  whole  field  at  a  glance.  He  had  the 
prophetic  eye  of  logic,  and  he  saw  the  end  from  the  be- 
ginning. The  exordium  itself  was  the  prophecy,  the 
assurance,  of  victory.  Men  saw  the  sun  of  Austerlitz, 
and  felt  that  the  Imperial  Guard  was  moving  on  to  the 
conflict.  He  came  out  of  the  conflict  with  the  immortal 
name  of  the  Defender  of  the  Constitution. 

15 


114  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

Of  this  speech,  and  the  mode  of  its  delivery,  one  of 
the  greatest  of  our  orators  has  said,  "  It  has  been  my 
fortune  to  hear  some  of  the  ablest  speeches  of  the  great- 
est living  orators  on  both  sides  of  the  water ;  but  I  must 
confess,  I  never  heard  any  thing  which  so  completely 
realized  my  conception  of  what  Demosthenes  was  when 
he  delivered  the  Oration  for  the  Crown."  I  venture  to 
add,  that,  taking  into  view  the  circumstances  under  which 
the  speech  was  delivered,  especially  the  brief  time  for 
preparation,  the  importance  of  the  subject,  the  breadth  of 
its  views,  the  strength  and  clearness  of  its  reasoning,  the 
force  and  beauty  of  its  style,  its  keen  wit,  its  repressed 
but  subduing  passion,  its  lofty  strains  of  eloquence,  the 
audience  to  which  it  was  addressed  (a  more  than  Roman 
Senate),  its  effect  upon  that  audience,  and  the  larger 
audience  of  a  grateful  and  admiring  country,  history  has 
no  nobler  example  of  reserved  power  brought  at  once 
and  effectively  into  action.  The  wretched  sophistries 
of  nullification  and  secession  were  swept  before  his 
burning  eloquence  as  the  dry  grass  is  swept  by  the 
fire  of  the  prairies. 

The  general  impression  in  hearing  Mr.  Webster  was,  I 
think,  that,  great  as  was  the  speech,  the  man  was  greater 
than  the  speech  ;  that  there  was  vast  reserved  power  be- 
hind the  power  ^n  action.  Sometimes  it  was  brought  to 
the  conflict  at  a  moment's  warning.  I  remember  such 
an  occasion  some  fourteen  years  ago.  It  was  at  a  small 
assembly  of  about  an  hundred  gentlemen.  Mr.  Webster 
had  spoken,  in  reply  to  a  sentiment  in  his  honor,  well, 
but  without  great  life  or  vigor.  A  remark  by  a  subse- 
quent speaker  looked  like  a  reflection  upon  his  public 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  115 

course.  It  were  better  to  have  roused  the  lion  from  his 
lair.  There  was  no  sudden  spring,  no  visible  passion ; 
but  you  could  see  and  feel  that  the  very  depths  of  his 
being  were  stirred.  Those  dark  eyes,  in  their  deep,  dark 
caverns,  glowed  like  stars.  The  hall  in  which  we  sat 
vibrated  with  the  vibrations  of  his  thought. 

The  speech  I  will  not  assume  to  report.  One  of  the 
topics,  I  remember,  was  his  relations  with  the  Common- 
wealth of  Massachusetts,  the  open  arms  with  which  she 
had  received  him,  the  kindness  she  had  heaped  upon 
him,  the  trust  and  confidence  she  had  reposed  in  him. 
His  great  heart  became  liquid  as  he  spoke,  and  he  poured 
it  out  in  love,  loyalty,  -and  gratitude  :  then,  drawing  him- 
self up  to  his  full  stature,  till  through  our  moist  and 
loving  eyes  his  proportions  seemed  colossal,  he  said,  with 
quiet  dignity  but  with  trembling  lips,  "  I  have  dared  to 
hope,  Mr.  President  and  gentlemen,  that  I  have  not 
proved  myself  wholly  unworthy  of  her  trust  and  con- 
fidence." I  never  before  understood  the  lines  of  Mil- 
ton: — 

"  The  angel  ended,  but  in  Adam's  ear 
So  charming  left  his  voice,  that  he  awhile 
Thought  him  still  speaking,  still  stood  fixed  to  hear." 

He  sleeps  well  by  the  sea  he  loved  so  well. 

His  prayer  was  granted.  When  his  eyes  were  turned 
to  behold  for  the  last  time  the  sun  in  heaven,  he  did  not 
see  him  shining  on  the  broken  and  dishonored  fragments 
of  a  once-glorious  Union. 

There  is  another  reason  for  the  composition  and  disci- 
pline of  the  army  of  the  reserve,  to  which  I  attach  much 
importance.  It  is,  that  power  in  reserve  is  necessary  to 


116  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

give  full  force  and  effect  to  power  in  action.  Of  the 
impressions  made  upon  us  by  the  use  of  great  power, 
material  or  spiritual,  one  of  the  most  striking,  I  think,  is 
the  sense  it  creates  of  power  not  used  ;  of  power  behind 
the  power  in  action,  greater  than  itself.  The  power 
which  is  wholly  spent  and  exhausted  in  the  effort  loses 
half  its  charm.  For  its  highest  effect,  it  must  beget 
the  impression,  that  we  see  but  in  part,  the  arc  of  a 
power  full-orbed,  the  stream  from  a  full,  overflowing 
fountain,  the  vanguard  of  a  greater  host.  We  do  not 
admire  the  well  whose  bottom  is  hit  by  every  dip  of  the 
bucket,  the  mill-pond  that  is  drained  for  one  grist  (even 
if  it  be  our  corn),  the  picture  without  a  background,  the 
quiver  with  one  arrow,  the  hen  with  one  chicken,  the 
mind  with  one  idea,  the  heavens  with  one  star,  even  if 
it  be  the  north  star. 

A  speech  seems  to  us  truly  great,  only  when  a  man 
stands  behind  it  who  is  greater  than  the  speech,  with 
power  in  reserve ;  not  if  it  plainly  drains  his  memory, 
exhausts  his  vocabulary,  and  stretches  his  brain  to  lesion. 
It  is  not  merely  what  is  said,  but  who  says  it ;  not  merely 
what  he  says,  but  what  he  is. 

When,  in  a  crisis  of  our  history,  there  was  given,  at  a 
festive  celebration  in  Washington,  the  sentiment,  "  The 
Federal  Union,  it  must  be  preserved"  the  words  and  the 
thought  were  familiar  and  commonplace ;  but  the  devoted 
patriotism,  the  energetic  brain,  the  commanding  spirit, 
the  unflinching  courage,  the  iron  will,  of  Andrew  Jack- 
son were  behind  the  words,  and  the  country  breathed 
more  freely  for  their  utterance.  Would  to  God  our 
heroes  were  not  all  in  history ! 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  117 

"  Clan-Alpine's  best  are  backward  borne  : 

Where,  where,  was  Roderick  then  ? 
One  blast  upon  his  bugle-horn 
Were  worth  a  thousand  men." 

Of  material  power,  it  is  also  true,  that  its  effect  is 
deepened  and  strengthened  by  the  sense  of  a  greater 
power  behind  the  power  we  see  or  hear  or  feel. 

Night,  solemn,  glorious  night,  with  its  hosts  of  stars, 
has  its  army  of  the  reserve,  of  suns  and  stars  behind  the 
stars  we  see,  in  infinite  procession ;  the  countless  legions 
whose  banners  of  light  never  yet  waved  to  mo'rtal  eye. 

Nature  indeed,  in  her  beauty  or  in  her  grandeur ;  in 
the  dewdrop  sparkling  in  the  chalice  of  a  flower,  or  in 
Mont  Blanc  touched  with  the  first  light  of  morning ; 
in  the  field-brook  that  sings  with  the  singing  corn,  or  in 
Erie  pouring  out  its  world  of  waters ;  in  summer's 
breeze  or  winter's  tempest ;  in  glassy  lake  or  surging 
ocean ;  first  deeply  impresses  us  when  we  feel  its  re- 
served power,  see  on  its  face  the  smile,  and  read  in  its 
living  lines  the  thoughts,  of  God. 

Art  also  touches  and  moves  us  by  its  reserved  power. 

This  picture  is  true  to  the  rules,  the  idea  of  the 
painter  fairly  brought  out,  the  work  finished  even  with 
the  minutest  detail  of  Dusseldorf.  It  is  not  without 
power,  but  power  fully  spent  and  exhausted.  We  look 
and  comprehend  it,  and  do  not  care  to  look  again.  It 
has  no  reserved  power;  nothing  to  pay  for  a  second 
coming. 

Here  is  another,  of  which  a  critic  has  said,  "  It  was  a 
crude  painted  medley,  with  a  general  foggy  appearance." 
Be  not  dismayed ;  look  again,  look  into  it.  The  fog 


118  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

gradually  lifts  up,  and  the  picture  comes  out  of  seeming 
chaos,  and  marshals  itself  into  light  and  order  and  beauty. 
Some  mist  may  yet  hang  over  it ;  but  it  glows  and  is  alive 
with  the  genius  and  the  inspiration  of  the  poet-painter. 

In  the  great  masters  of  English  thought  (of  the  world's 
thought),  you  have  striking  examples  of  this  reserved 
power.  You  read  an  Essay  of  Bacon,  or  the  "Advance- 
ment of  Learning,"  twenty  times.  New  forces  of  wisdom 
and  beauty  come  out  at  every  reading.  You  find  the 
most  diligent  study  has  not  exhausted  the  depths  of 
meaning.  With  a  telescopic  vision,  what  seem  to  be 
nebula3  now  would  be  resolved  into  burning  stars.  You 
get  some  idea  of  the  height  and  breadth  of  Bacon  by 
reading  the  edition  of  his  Essays  by  Whately.  The 
archbishop  is  a  sensible  man,  of  large  mental  stature  ; 
but  how  he  looks  trotting  along  by  the  side  of  Lord 
Bacon,  and  occasionally  throwing  over  his  shoulders  a 
corner  of  the  giant's  mantle  ! 

And  the  great  master  of  the  drama ;  the  priest  who  sat 
at  the  confessional  of  the  human  passions  ;  the  philoso- 
pher who  unravelled  the  mysteries  of  our  being  as  the 
cunning  fingers  of  Miss  Prissy  would  untangle  a  snarled 
thread ;  the  child  of  Nature,  who  laid  his  ear  so  close  to 
his  mother's  heart  that  he  could  hear  its  faintest  beatings ; 
historian,  statesman,  sage,  poet  (IIOIHTES,  maker):  such 
is  our  sense  of  reserved  power  in  him,  that  what  we  most 
admire  and  love,  as  "  Hamlet,"  "  Macbeth,"  "  Lear,"  the 
"  Tempest,"  seem  really  but  the  plays  of  Shakspeare,  the 
sport  and  pastime  of  his  mighty  spirit ;  waves  born  to 
our  feet  from  a  deep  sea  our  oar  has  never  vexed  or 
plummet  sounded. 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  119 

Burke,  whom  the  late  Mr.  Buckle  would  put  in 
a  strait-jacket,  but  who  will  be  likely  to  outlive  his 
keepers ;  ( quis  custodiet  custodes  ?}  whose  volume  of 
thought  pours  out  very  much  as  Niagara  pours  over  the 
Horseshoe,  with  the  rapid's  thunder,  the  mist,  the  spray, 
the  bow  of  everlasting  beauty ;  never  seems  exhausted, 
but  as  if  there  were  an  hundred  inland  seas  of  thought 
behind,  waiting  to  be  poured  out. 

A  little  reflection  will  satisfy  us  how  constantly,  though 
it  may  be  unconsciously,  we  use  this  test  of  the  fulness 
or  want  of  reserved  power.  You  read  a  book,  an  essay, 
or  an  article  in  a  review,  and  you  determine  almost  at  a 
glance  whether  the  matter  has  just  been  pumped  into  the 
author's  skull,  and  then  pumped  out  again,  or  whether 
he  draws  from  a  full  living  spring.  The  modern  multi- 
plication of  books  is,  for  the  most  part,  the  pouring  of 
water  from  one  pitcher  into  another.  Very  few  of  them 
are  mixed,  as  Mr.  Opie  mixed  his  colors,  with  brains.  As 
we  grow  older,  we  seek  the  fountains,  the  old  wells  of 
English  undefiled ;  for  the  great  teachers  of  the  race 
and  of  the  coming  generations  have  spoken  or  written  in 
our  mother-tongue.  I  shall  go  to  my  grave,  I  fear,  in  the 
delusion  that  Bacon, 

"  In  one  rich  soul, 
Plato,  the  Stagyrite,  and  Tully,  joined ;  " 

that  Shakspeare  held  the  perfect  mirror  up  to  nature  ; 
that  the  "  Paradise  Lost "  is  the  greatest  of  epics,  if  not 
the  first;  that,  of  written  and  forensic  eloquence,  the 
great  masters  are  Edmund  Burke  and  Thomas  Erskine  ; 
that  no  man  is  fitted  for  the  bar,  the  pulpit,  or  the  chair 
of  instruction,  who  has  not  given  himself  to  the  diligent 


120  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

and  thorough  study  of  the  English  classics.  A  certain 
grace,  polish,  refinement,  may  be  got  in  other  schools : 
these  constitute  our  pabulum  vitce. 

Reserved  power  may  not  always  prevent  partial  defeat 
or  temporary  failure ;  but  it  will  avert  the  dismay  and 
despondency  which  too  often  follow  partial  failure.  The 
man  of  reserved  power  may  bend  before  the  storm  ;  but 
he  will  bend  only  as,  Landor  says,  "  the  oak  bends  before 
the  passing  wind,  to  rise  again  in  its  majesty  and  in  its 
strength."  Nay,  it  seems  at  times  as  if,  Anteeus-like,  he 
got  new  strength  from  contact  with  the  earth,  new  vigor 
from  the  fall.  Apparent  defeat  may  be  real  victory  ;  the 
moving  from  Moultrie  to  Sumter.  His  army  of  the 
reserve  may  not  have  been  brought  into  action  at 
the  needed  moment.  'He  will  be  ready  for  another 
trial.  He  knows  the  power  is  in  him,  and  will  do  its 
work. 

We  all  remember  the  case  of  Sheridan.  After  his 
first  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  asked  Mr. 
Woodfall  what  he  tnought  of  it.  "I  am  sorry  to  say,  I 
do  not  think  it  is  in  your  line.  You  had  much  better 
have  stuck  to  your  old  pursuits."  —  "  It  is  in  me,  and  it 
shall  come  out."  It  did  indeed  come  out.  He  lived  to 
hear  from  Pitt  (no  longer  sneering  Pitt)  the  motion,  that 
the  House  of  Commons  should  adjourn  to  recover  from  the 
effects  of  Mr.  Sheridan's  eloquence. 

The  brilliant  writer  and  statesman  D'Israeli,  late  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer,  and  leader  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  was  literally  groaned  and  sneered  down  in  his 
first  attempt  to  speak  upon  the  floor.  He  knew  his  re- 
served strength.  "  The  day  will  come  when  you  will  be 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  121 

glad  to  hear  me."  It  came  long  ago.  He  is  to-day,  with, 
the  exception  of  his  successor,  Mr.  Gladstone,  the  most 
effective  debater  in  the  Commons  of  England. 

The  material  army  of  the  reserve,  though  trained  by 
the  discipline  of  conflict  and  endurance,  is  worn  and 
wasted  by  the  same  cause.  Its  thinned  and  broken  ranks 
must  be  filled  and  replenished  with  new  life,  new  brain, 
bone,  and  muscle. 

It  is  not  wholly  so  with  the  spiritual  army  of  the 
reserve.  This,  too,  is  trained  and  strengthened  by  strug- 
gle and  suffering :  but,  in  this,  every  accretion  of  power 
is  permanent;  every  enlistment  not  only  for  the  cam- 
paign of  life,  but  for  the  life  everlasting.  It  is  a  beauti- 
ful doctrine,  which  the  study  of  the  human  mind  tends 
more  and  more  to  confirm,  that  knowledge,  once  gained, 
is  never  lost ;  that  we  never  really  forget ;  that  what  we 
call  imperfection  of  memory  is  but  a  defect  in  the  mate- 
rial instrument,  some  mist  or  dulness  in  the  mirror  which 
reflects  the  beam  of  light.  It  is  a  beautiful  doctrine,  but 
a  fearful  one  ;  suggesting  the  questions,  What  knowledges 
have  we  garnered  in  this  everlasting  storehouse  ?  on  what 
spiritual  breads  have  we  fed,  that  have  thus  entered  into 
the  very  substance  and  framework  of  our  being  ?  what 
unfading  pictures  have  been  frescoed  on  the  ever-endur- 
ing walls  of  the  soul "? 

It  is,  I  trust,  scarcely  necessary  to  suggest,  that  though 
our  spiritual  powers  enlarge  by  use,  and  are  nurtured 
by  effort  and  struggle,  there  are  limits  to  the  law ;  that 
they  do  not  grow  by  over- work ;  that  the  bow  must  not 
always  be  bent,  and  never  strained.  I  have  no  faith  in 
working  with  jaded  powers,  or  in  holding  up,  as  exem- 

16 


122          THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

plars  to  the  young,  the  men  who  give  their  nights  as  well 
as  days  to  study. 

"  And  wherefore  does  the  student  trim  his  lamp, 
And  watch  his  lonely  taper,  when  the  stars 
Are  holding  their  high  festival  in  heaven, 
And  worshipping  around  the  midnight  throne  ?  " 

The  just  and  sensible  answer  to  this  glowing  question 
is,  Because  he  don't  know  any  better ;  because  he  don't 
understand,  or  care  to  recognize  and  obey,  the  laws  of  his 
spiritual  as  well  as  physical  health  and  life.  It  were  far 
better  for  him  to  be  infolded  in  the  arms  of  "  Nature's 
sweet  restorer,  gentle  sleep." 

In  a  busy  life,  we  cannot  measure  our  daily  work  by 
exact  rules.  The  true  rule  is,  to  work  much,  not  many 
hours.  More  work  must  be  done  on  one  day  than  an- 
other :  but  eight  hours  of  mental  labor  is  enough  for  the 
most  vigorous  constitution ;  more  than  most  men  can  do 
with  safety.  He  who  seeks  to  do  more  must  often  bring 
to  his  work  a  flagging  brain ;  or  if  he  be  of  the  class,  who, 
when  they  work,  must  work  with  intensity,  break,  not 
indeed  his  spirit  vital  in  every  part,  but  the  material 
instruments  by  which  it  works. 

No  better  illustration  of  these  truths  can  be  found 
than  in  New  England's  most  accomplished  advocate. 

Of  brilliant  powers,  enriched  by  wide  and  varied  cul- 
ture ;  of  rapid  perceptions ;  of  retentive  and  capacious 
memory ;  of  rich,  glowing,  Oriental  imagination ;  of  a 
quiet  and  subtle  wit,  whose  delicate  aroma  it  is  in  vain  to 
hope  to  preserve;  with  that  projectile  force  of  mind 
which  is  the  peculiar  trait  of  a  great  advocate ;  with  a 
logic  keen  and  vigorous,  though,  like  the  dagger  of  Har- 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  123 

modius,  it  was  often  hidden  beneath  the  myrtles  ;  with  a 
heart  gentle  as  a  woman's,  yet  capable  of  stiffening  its 
sinews  ;  with  little  inclination  to  social  life,  yet  the  most 
delightful  of  companions,  —  Mr.  Choate  was,  at  the  bar 
or  in  his  own  library,  the  most  interesting  man  it  has  been 
my  privilege  to  know :  yet,  during  the  last  six  years  of 
his  life  (and  it  was  during  those  years  I  saw  him  most 
frequently),  I  never  heard  him,  even  hi  the  most  brilliant 
of  his  efforts,  without  a  feeling  of  sadness.  He  not  only 
worked  too  much,  but  he  had  no  just  economy  of  labor. 
He  did  a  thousand  things  which  men  of  narrower  capa- 
city might  have  done  as  well,  or  well  enough.  He  ex- 
pended upon  his  work  a  vast  amount  of  superfluous 
strength.  He  brought  the  whole  army  of  the  reserve 
into  action,  when  the  victory  might  have  been  easily  and 
gracefully  won  by  the  van  and  corps  of  battle.  If  he  had 
tried  half  as  many  causes,  worked  half  as  many  hours, 
he  would  have  been  a  yet  greater  man,  and  his  life  might 
have  been  spared  to  the  courts  of  which  he  was  the  pride 
and  ornament ;  nay,  more,  those  large  and  generous 
powers  might  have  been  used  upon  a  broader  theatre, 
and  for  nobler  and  more  enduring  service.  As  it  was,  we 
may  write  upon  his  monument  the  inscription  upon  the 
bust  of  Erskine  at  Holland  House  :  — 

"  Nostrse  eloquentiae  forensis  facile  princeps." 

Pardon  one  or  two  practical  suggestions. 

We  all  need  this  reserved  power ;  but  it  comes  only 
from  the  union  of  contemplation  and  action.  Our  life  is 
stir,  bustle,  everlasting  motion  ;  the  whistle  of  the  engine, 
the  click  of  the  telegraph. 


124:  THE    ARMY    OF   THE    RESERVE. 

"  We  pry  not  into  the  interior ;   but,  like  the  martlet, 
Build  in  the  weather,  on  the  outward  wall, 
Even  in  the  force  and  road  of  casualty." 

The  business  of  life  should  be  so  conducted  as  to  give 
us  time  for  quiet  study  and  meditation.  The  best  pro- 
cesses of  culture  must  be  perfected  in  our  own  libraries, 
with  patient  toil  and  thought. 

The  mind  requires  not  only  diversity  of  discipline,  but 
generosity  of  diet.  It  will  not  grow  to  full,  well-rounded 
proportions  and  robust  strength  upon  any  one  aliment. 

There  is  no  profession  or  pursuit  in  life,  which,  fol- 
lowed with  exclusive  devotion,  will  not  narrow  and  con- 
tract the  mind. 

Philanthropy  is  a  good  thing ;  but,  if  a  man  lives  upon 
it,  it  sours  the  milk,  and  curdles  the  blood,  till  the  love  of 
the  race  becomes  the  hatred  of  every  man  and  woman 
that  compose  it. 

Theology  is  a  good  thing ;  but,  if  a  man  fed  upon  that 
only,  his  bones  would  cleave  to  his  skin.  The  teacher 
of  it  must,  by  constant  reading  and  study,  replenish  the 
exhausted  fountains  of  thought.  It  is  the  spider  only 
that  weaves  from  his  own  entrails,  and  he  weaves  in 
circles.  The  writer  without  such  refreshment  is  the 
constant  repetition  of  himself ;  the  turning  of  the  wheel 
upon  its  own  axis ;  incessant  motion,  but  no  progress ; 
the  travelling  in  the  same  old  ruts  with  the  old  "  one-hoss 
shay." 

The  law  is  a  good  thing ;  but  no  man  can  be  a  great 
lawyer  who  knows  nothing  else.  The  study  and  practice 
of  the  law  tend  to  acumen  rather  than  breadth,  to  sub- 
tlety rather  than  strength.  The  air  is  thin  among  the 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.  125 

apices  of  the  law,  as  on  the  granite  needles  of  the  Alps. 
We  must  come  down  for  refreshment  and  strength  to  the 
quiet  valleys  at  their  feet. 

Pope  was  wrong.  The  Ovid  was  not  in  Murray  lost. 
Lord  Mansfield  was  the  greater  lawyer  and  judge,  be- 
cause the  Ovid  grew  and  was  developed  in  him.  For  his 
comprehensive  grasp  of  great  principles,  for  those  large 
constructive  powers  by  which  he  built  up  the  modern 
commercial  law  of  England,  for  the  beauty  and  crystal 
clearness  of  his  style,  we  are  indebted,  in  no  small  de- 
gree, to  his  wide  and  varied  culture. 

The  law  is  not  a  "  jealous  mistress : "  she  is  a  very 
sensible  mistress.  She  does  not  object  to  an  evening 
with  the  Muses  or  the  Graces,  provided  we  do  not  remain 
into  the  small  hours  of  the  morning.  The  farewell  of 
Blackstone  to  his  Muse  is  unnecessarily  pathetic.  The 
confused  air  and  shuffling  gait  with  which  he  takes  his 
leave  of  her  ladyship  indicate  that  the  relations  were  not 
very  ultimate  or  confidential.  He  was  in  no  danger. 

Commerce  is  a  noble  thing.  The  pioneer  of  civiliza- 
tion, the  diplomatist  of  peace,  "  her  line  is  gone  out 
through  all  the  earth,  and  her  words  to  the  end  of  the 
world."  But  a  man  cannot  live  upon  the  bread  of  traffic 
only.  He  needs  a  yet  higher  commerce  (to  modify  the 
thought  of  Bacon) ;  the  unfreighting  of  those  ships  that 
come  down  to  us  through  the  vast  seas  of  time,  laden 
with  the  wisdom  of  ages. 

The  country  must  have  its  reserved  power.  It  con- 
sists, not  in  wider  dominion,  in  material  progress,  in 
wealth,  in  luxury,  in  the  subjection  of  nature  to  the  mind 
and  will  of  man.  These  but  enlarge  the  theatre  of 


126  THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE. 

human  passions  and  interests :  the  actors  and  the  drama 
remain  the  same. 

Have  we  no  reason  to  fear,  that,  in  subduing  the  earth, 
the  earth  has,  to  some  extent,  subdued  us ;  that,  while 
mind  has  mastered  matter,  it  has  also  worshipped  it ;  that 
we  have  given  our  hearts  to  the  idols  which  our  cunning 
fingers  have  moulded ;  that  ours  has  become  the  condi- 
tion of  Faust,  when  he  summoned  to  his  presence  the 
spirit  of  the  earth,  and  felt,  at  first,  his  energies  exalted 
and  glowing  as  with  new  wine,  but  found  he  could  not 
mate  himself  with  the  spirit  he  had  evoked,  and,  in  his 
despair,  exclaimed,  "  If  I  had  the  power  to  draw  thee  to 
me,  I  have  no  power  to  hold  thee  "  ? 

Our  strength,  our  reserved  power,  is  in  our  fidelity  to 
the  principles  on  which  these  States  were  founded,  in 
which  their  youth  was  nurtured,  by  which  they  were 
ripened  together  into  one  national  life ;  loyalty  to  free- 
dom, obedience  to  law,  then,  now,  and  for  ever,  one  and 
inseparable. 

The  founders  of  the  Republic  did  not  believe  that 
government  was  merely  moral  suasion ;  that  liberty  was 
the  absence  of  wholesome  restraint ;  that  laws  were  to  be 
obeyed  only  when  obedience  was  agreeable  ;  the  country 
to  be  defended  and  saved  only  when  the  subject  should 
volunteer ;  that  the  Constitution  was  to  be  supreme  only 
when  it  was  convenient ;  the  Union  a  mere  silken  string, 
from  which  States  might  be  slipped  by  secession  or 
severed  by  treason.  No  enduring  fabric  can  rest  on  such 
dogmas.  The  roots  of  civil  government  strike  deep,  and 
find  nutriment  and  support  in  the  depths  of  the  Divine 
Will.  Law  is  a  sword  as  well  as  a  shield ;  there  is  no 


THE  ARMY  OF  THE  RESERVE.          127 

liberty  but  within  its  pale :  the  defence  of  the  country, 
at  the  cost  of  treasure  or  of  life,  is  the  first  of  civil 
duties ;  the  Constitution,  in  war  as  in  peace,  is  the 
supreme  law,  the  bond  of  equal  States,  inseparable, 
without  limit  of  time,  immutable  except  in  the  mode 
itself  points  out. 

These  plain  principles,  now  somewhat  old-fashioned, 
not  to  say  obsolete,  make  up  for  the  country  its  moral 
army  of  the  reserve. 

Brethren,  this  dear  country  of  ours  is  in  extreme  peril. 
For  her  succor  and  deliverance,  she  needs  all  your  wis- 
dom and  all  your  strength,  the  counsels  of  age,  the 
vigor  of  manhood,  the  flower  of  youth.  God  of  our 
fathers,  gird  us  for  the  work :  by  tribulation  and  suffer- 
ing, by  this  baptism  of  fire  and  of  blood,  purify  and  gird 
us  for  the  work  of  her  salvation.  God  of  our  fathers, 
we  can  save  her,  and  we  will.  Redeemed,  purified, 
plucked  as  a  brand  from  the  burning,  we  will  give  her 
once  more  to  thy  service,  in  which  alone  is  perfect 
freedom. 


128 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA. 


OCTOBER  31,  1862. 


FELLOW-CITIZENS,  —  An  important  election  is  at  hand. 
No  thoughtful  man  ever  casts  a  vote  without  inquiry  as 
to  his  duty.  At  a  time  like  this,  he  is  painfully  anxious. 
He  feels  he  cannot  use  it  to  gratify  personal  or  party 
predilections ;  that  it  belongs  to  the  country,  and  must 
be  so  given  as  best  to  serve  her  interests.  For  eighteen 
months  we  had  been  engaged  in  a  civil  war,  whose 
extent,  whose  intense  bitterness,  whose  consumption  of 
treasure  and  of  most  precious  blood,  have  no  parallel  in 
history.  The  struggle  was  tasking  to  the  uttermost  the 
resources  of  the  loyal  States.  The  people  believed 
the  war  was  just  and  necessary.  They  saw  no  hope 
for  the  country  but  hi  its  vigorous  prosecution.  They 
had  been  grievously  disappointed  by  the  want  of  pro- 
gress in  suppressing  the  Rebellion.  They  were  mortified 
and  chagrined  by  disasters  and  defeats,  followed  by 
lame  and  impotent  apologies.  They  were  disgusted 
by  the  frauds  of  contractors,  the  jealousies  of  command- 
ers, the  selfishness  of  politicians,  the  want  of  unity, 
method,  and  persistent  vigor  in  the  public  counsels,  with 
the  presence  everywhere  of  politicians  and  office-hold- 
ers, unchastened  by  the  public  calamities,  obtruding  upon 
the  Executive  councils,  dictating  to  Congress,  meddling 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA.  129 

with  the  command  and  direction  of  the  armies,  seeking 
to  control  the  elections,  growing  fat  upon  the  public  dis- 
tresses. Many  of  them  were  grieved  and  alarmed  at  the 
absence  of  respect,  to  use  no  harsh  word,  manifested 
by  some  of  their  servants  for  the  ancient  and  sacred 
muniments  of  personal  liberty ;  without  which,  free 
government  is  a  mockery,  and  life  itself  a  burden.  Hope 
deferred  was  making  the  heart  sick.  In  that  day  of  dis- 
traction and  anxiety  and  thick  gloom,  one  thing  seemed 
to  be  as  clear  as  the  sun  at  mid-day ;  and  that  was,  the 
necessity  of  an  united  North  ;  that  all  its  wisdom,  all  its 
energy,  all  its  strength,  should  be  combined,  converged, 
projected  into  one  purpose,  one  issue,  one  aim,  —  the 
suppression  of  armed  rebellion  by  force  of  arms. 

As  this  was  a  common  cause,  infinitely  transcending 
all  party  questions,  with  which  Republican,  Whig,  and 
Democrat  were  alike  concerned ;  for  which,  justice  com- 
pels us  to  say,  they  had  made  equal  sacrifices,  and  must 
share  equal  burdens  ;  as  the  peculiar  objects  for  which 
the  party  in  power  had  been  organized  were  already 
attained  by  the  legislation  of  Congress ;  no  sound,  sub- 
stantial reason  existed  for  upholding  the  old  party  bar- 
riers, or  drawing,  with  any  rigor,  the  old  party  lines.  On 
the  other  hand,  patriotism  and  sound  policy  seemed  to 
require  that  party  organizations  should,  during  the  war 
at  least,  be  given  up ;  for  these  organizations,  though 
often  the  result  of  differences  of  opinion,  are  as  often 
the  cause.  When  men  are  working  together  for  a  com- 
mon end,  and  with  no  visible  line  of  separation,  they 
will  converge,  assimilate,  and  cleave  together.  Make  a 
breach  between  them  which  is  palpable,  and,  however 

17 


130  SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA. 

narrow  at  first,  it  will  constantly  widen.  Differences, 
slight  at  the  start,  will  enlarge  by  conflict  and  repulsion, 
till  unity  of  action  and  effort  are  no  longer  practicable. 

The  Republican  party  has  had,  and  has  now,  the  as- 
cendency in  this  Commonwealth.  It  was  inclined  at  first 
to  pursue  a  liberal  policy.  It  would  to-day,  if  its  wise 
and  prudent  men  controlled  its  movements.  It  is  made 
up  of  two  wings.  The  first  consists  of  those  who  are 
opposed  to  slavery ;  who  desire  to  see  its  restriction  with- 
in its  present  limits,  and  its  removal  from  places  where 
the  power  of  the  National  Government  is  supreme  ;  but 
who  also  hold,  "  that  the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the 
rights  of  the  States,  and  especially  the  right  of  each 
State  to  order  and  control  its  own  domestic  institutions 
according  to  its  own  judgment  exclusively,  is  essential  to 
that  balance  of  powers  on  which  the  perfection  and  en- 
durance of  our  political  fabric  depends  "  (Chicago  Plat- 
form) ;  and  that  the  war  is  prosecuted  "  for  the  purpose 
of  practically  restoring  the  constitutional  relations  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  each  of  the  States  and  the 
people  thereof,  in  which  States  that  relation  is  or  may  be 
suspended  or  disturbed"  (President's  Proclamation  of 
Sept.  22)  ;  and  that,  when  this  object  is  attained,  the  war 
ought  to  cease.  This  is  the  Conservative  wing. 

The  other  wing  consists  of  those,  who,  for  want  of  a 
better  word,  may  be  called  Abolitionists  ;  men  who,  with 
more  or  less  indirection,  circuitous  navigation  of  thought 
and  word,  come  at  last  to  the  point,  that  Constitution  or 
no  Constitution,  Union  or  no  Union,  endure  the  war  as 
long  as  it  may,  be  the  cost  and  carnage  and  exhaustion 
what  they  may,  slavery  shall  be  abolished.  This  wing 


SPEECH   AT    CHELSEA.  131 

of  the  party  is  now  in  the  ascendant,  and  rules  the  party 
with  a  rod  of  iron.  They  arranged  and  controlled  the 
Annual  Convention.  They  saw  to  it  that  no  man  was 
nominated  who  did  not  embrace  their  extreme  views, 
though  they  were  kind  enough  to  include  some  very 
recent  converts.  They  covered  their  leaders  with  adula- 
tion thicker  than  a  man's  loins,  and  snubbed  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  because  their  platform  was  too 
narrow  for  him  to  stand  upon.  They  made  the  test  of 
loyalty,  fidelity  to  men,  instead  of  devotion  to  the  country. 
This  wing  of  the  party  arranges  and  controls  all  the  pre- 
liminary meetings,  sets  in  motion  all  the  party  machinery, 
and  makes  all  the  party  nominations.  So  far  as  its  power 
extends,  not  a  man,  holding  what  are  usually  termed 
conservative  views,  will  be  elected  to  any  place,  state  or 
national.  Never  was  proscription  so  rigid,  so  bitter,  so 
universal.  They  go  now  one  step  further.  Assuming 
that  the  President  has  at  last  yielded  to  their  pressure, 
and  has  adopted  their  policy,  they  denounce  as  a  traitor 
every  man  who  hesitates  as  to  the  wisdom  of  the  pro- 
clamation, or  who  fails  to  give  it  their  interpretation. 
Without  stopping  to  murmur  or  complain,  one  may  be 
permitted  to  say,  that  such  charges  come  with  little 
grace  from  men,  who,  but  a  few  weeks  ago,  felt  the 
defence  of  the  country,  under  the  then  policy,  to  be  a 
heavy  draft  upon  their  patriotism ;  with  still  less  grace 
from  those  of  them  who  have  for  years  been  laboring  to 
destroy  the  blessed  Union  of  our  fathers,  and  who  even 
now  repudiate  it  with  hissing  and  scorn. 

In  this  condition  of  things,  the  severance  of  political 
associations  is  natural,  is  perhaps  inevitable.     The  differ- 


132  SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA. 

ences  of  principle  and  of  policy  are  too  great  to  be 
reconciled.  The  Radicals,  upon  their  own  showing, 
neither  want  nor  need  our  aid.  We,  the  Conservatives, 
must  be  true  to  our  convictions  of  duty,  and  stand  to  the 
last  by  the  Union  and  Constitution.  But,  while  these  dif- 
ferences of  opinion  and  policy  exist,  we  can  unite  in  the 
vigorous  prosecution  of  this  war  till  the  rebels  lay  down 
their  arms,  whoever  shall  constitute  the  National  and 
State  administrations.  We  can  give  them  a  vigorous 
and  unhesitating  support  in  the  discharge  of  this  great 
and  imperative  duty.  We  can  and  should  avoid  all  cap- 
tious opposition  or  criticism ;  but  we  may  not  and  will 
not  surrender  our  judgments  or  our  consciences.  We 
will  not  forget  who  are  the  servants,  and  who  the  mas- 
'ters.  We  will  elect,  if  we  can,  to  places  of  power,  men 
who  reflect  our  opinions.  We  will  send  men  to  Con- 
gress who  will  sustain  the  Administration  in  all  constitu- 
tional and  just  measures,  and  hold  them  back,  if  possible, 
from  a  radical  and  destructive  policy.  We  don't  propose 
to  rehabilitate  the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience,  or  of  an 
infallible  political  church.  In  war,  as  in  peace,  freedom 
of  thought  and  utterance  is  to  the  body  politic  what 
vital  air  is  to  the  human  system.  It  cannot  live  with- 
out it. 

I  am  one  of  those  who  are  content  with  the  Constitu- 
tion as  it  is,  and  the  Union  as  it  was ;  the  Constitution 
fairly  interpreted  in  the  spirit  of  its  founders.  I  have 
felt  no  misgivings,  and  had  no  mental  reservations,  in 
swearing  to*  support  it.  To  me  the  oath  was  the  pledge, 
not  of  duty  merely,  but  of  love  and  devotion.  I  mean 
to  keep  that  oath ;  and,  with  such  strength  as  may  be 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA.  133 

given  me,  to  uphold  and  defend  that  Constitution,  be- 
cause the  life  of  the  nation  is  bound  up  in  it ;  because 
the  preservation  of  the  Constitution,  and  the  preservation 
of  the  Union,  are  not  two  questions,  but  one  question ; 
are  not  two  issues,  but  one  and  the  same  issue.  I  have 
lived  half  a  century  without  discovering  or  suspecting 
that  the  "  Constitution  was  a  failure."  On  the  other 
hand,  I  have  ever  regarded  it  as  the  noblest  product  of 
the  human  mind ;  the  work  of  men  chastened  by  adver- 
sity, disciplined  by  trial;  in  their  conscious  weakness, 
seeking  the  Divine  Strength  ;  believing  that  God  governs 
in  the  affairs  of  men ;  assured  that,  "  except  the  Lord 
build  the  house,  they  labor  in  vain  who  build  it."  That 
Constitution  has  given  us  a  Government  felt  only  in  its 
blessings  ;  under  whose  benign  and  quickening  influences 
the  nation  sprung  up  to  greatness,  her  commerce  whiten- 
ing every  sea,  the  stars  on  her  banner  kindled  by  the 
light  of  a  never-setting  sun;  a  model  Republic,  which 
won  for  itself  the  homage  and  admiration  of  mankind,  — 
the  fear  of  kings,  to  struggling  humanity,  inspiration 
and  hope.  It  is  very  easy  to  say  the  Constitution  is  not 
perfect.  I  am  not  wise  enough  to  build  a  better,  and  do 
not  know  the  men  who  are.  It  is  easy  to  express  regret 
at  what  are  called  its  compromises.  You  may  as  well 
regret  it  was  ever  made.  All  government  is  compromise, 
save  as  it  is  rooted  in  the  Divine  Will.  Social  order  is 
mutual  concession.  The  Constitution  was  the  best  com- 
promise that  could  be  made  ;  and  the  experience  of  more 
than  seventy  years  has  not  taught  us  how  to  make  a 
wiser  one. 

That  Constitution  is  the  bond  of  national  unity.     Re- 


134  SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA. 

bellion,  under  the  guise  of  Secession,  sought  to  sever 
the  bond,  to  cut  the  thread  of  the  national  life.  We 
grasped  the  sword  to  vindicate  the  Constitution,  to  save 
the  national  unity.  Never  was  the  sword  drawn  in  a 
holier  cause.  Never  was  a  war  more  just  or  more 
strictly  defensive.  It  was  not  only  the  sacred  right  and 
duty  of  government  to  wage  it,  but  the  necessity  of  its 
being.  That  right,  in  its  length  and  its  breadth,  is  the 
right  to  enforce  the  laws.  Within  the  pale  of  the  Con- 
stitution, States  and  people  may  be  held  to  obedience. 
Outside  of  that  pale,  the  whole  struggle  is  revolutionary. 
I  put  the  plain  question  to  every  honest  conscience,  How 
can  I,  by  force  of  arms,  by  fire,  and  the  sword,  compel 
obedience  to  a  law  I  do  not  respect  myself  \  How  can  I 
vindicate  the  law  with  the  sword  in  my  right  hand,  and 
break  it  with  the  hammer  in  my  left  I  No  subtlety  of 
logic,  no  refinement  of  casuistry,  can  evade  or  conceal 
the  answer.  The  right  of  revolution  remains  intact ; 
but  this  Government  has  never  pretended  that  it  was 
waging  a  war  of  revolution.  Its  claim,  thus  far,  has 
been  to  wage  a  war  under  the  Constitution  for  the  Con- 
stitution. This  plain  view  of  the  struggle  I  have  taken 
from  the  beginning.  The  progress  of  events  has  served 
to  deepen  my  conviction  of  its  soundness.  I  never 
doubted  that  the  Constitution  clothed  the  Government 
with  all  powers  necessary  to  the  efficient  prosecution  of 
the  war.  I  never  doubted  that  fidelity  to  that  Constitu- 
tion was  our  safety  and  strength,  and  that  every  way  that 
diverged  from  it  was  the  way  to  death. 

The  common  mode  of  argument  is  to  assume  that  a 
certain  policy  is  necessary,  and  then  to  infer  that  it  is 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA.  135 

within  the  Constitution.  Take,  for  example,  the  policy 
of  confiscating  the  property  of  non-combatants,  outside  of 
the  conflict  of  arms,  and  without  conviction  of  the  owner. 
The  measure  is,  in  my  judgment,  in  direct  conflict  with 
the  Constitution  ;  but  it  is  also  in  conflict  with  the  law  of 
nations,  and  with  every  principle  of  justice  and  human- 
ity. The  judgment  and  conscience  of  every  Christian 
nation  condemn  it.  Such  a  law  is  not  a  source  of 
strength,  but  of  weakness.  With  all  deference  to  the 
judgment  of  others,  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  say,  that  the  un- 
constitutional measures  passed  or  proposed  by  the  Radical 
party  in  Congress  have  done  as  much  to  protract  the  war 
as  all  the  treasure  that  has  been  spent,  and  all  the  blood 
that  has  been  shed,  have  done  to  end  it.  They  shook 
the  public  faith  and  confidence.  Men  cannot  be  taught 
to  understand,  that,  in  enforcing  the  law,  it  is  necessary  to 
break  it ;  or,  hi  upholding  the  Constitution,  it  is  necessary 
to  violate  it.  These  measures  weakened  our  cause  in  the 
Border  States,  which  every  practical  man  has  seen,  from 
the  beginning,  to  be  the  battle-ground  of  this  contest ; 
retaining  which,  our  ultimate  triumph  was  almost  cer- 
tain ;  losing  which,  there  was  no  solid  ground  of  hope 
for  the  Union.  The  policy,  moreover,  cost  us  the  few 
friends  we  had  in  the  rebel  States.  It  kindled  into 
greater  intensity  the  hatred  of  the  foe,  and  nerved  him 
to  a  yet  more  desperate  and  bitter  struggle.  It  divided 
the  public  sentiment  of  the  North,  and  wounded  the 
Government  in  the  house  of  its  friends.  My  policy  in 
this  struggle  is  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war,  with 
careful  adherence  to  the  Constitution,  and  the  maxims  of 
moderation  and  humanity  with  which  civilization  and 


136  SPEECH   AT   CHELSEA. 

Christianity  have  tempered  the  ancient  iron  rules  of  war. 
Whenever  decisive  victories  are  achieved,  I  would  issue 
a  general  proclamation  of  amnesty  and  pardon,  except- 
ing only  a  few  of  the  leaders  most  deeply  steeped  in 
guilt.  Under  all  circumstances,  I  would  cling  to  the 
Constitution,  as  the  bond  of  unity  in  the  past,  as  the  only 
practical  bond  of  Union  in  the  future  ;  the  only  land 
lifted  above  the  waters  on  which  the  ark  of  Union  can 
be  moored.  From  that  ark  alone  will  go  out  the  Dove 
blessed  of  the  Spirit,  which  shall  return  bringing  in  its 
mouth  the  olive  branch  of  peace. 

The  policy  of  the  Abolitionists  is  expressed  in  the 
phrase,  the  Union  as  it  should  be,  or  the  Union  with- 
out slavery.  No  policy  could  be  more  attractive.  But 
let  us  probe  the  words,  and  get  at  the  depth  of  their 
meaning.  An  Union  without  slavery  implies  not  merely 
that  the  slaves  in  rebel  States  shall  be  emancipated, 
and  in  the  Border  loyal  States ;  but  that  the  States  shall 
be  deprived  of  the  power  of  upholding  slavery,  now  or 
in  the  future.  The  emancipation  of  slaves  now  in  the 
rebel  States  would  be  but  one  step  in  the  process.  To 
abolish  slavery  by  the  power  of  the  National  Govern- 
ment involves  a  fundamental  change  in  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  by  force  of  which  "  the  right  of  each 
State  to  order  and  control  its  own  domestic  institutions, 
according  to  its  own  judgment,"  is  taken  away  ;  a  right 
which  the  Republican  party  has  declared  "  was  essential 
to  that  balance  of  powers  on  which  the  perfection  and 
endurance  of  our  political  fabric  depends."  This  power 
of  the  State  to  regulate  its  internal  police  and  domestic 
institutions  is  a  vital,  essential  feature  of  our  civil  polity. 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA.  137 

If  it  may  be  taken  from  the  States  to  abolish  slavery,  it 
may  be  taken  from  them  for  any  purpose.  It  is  a  ques- 
tion of  power,  and  not  merely  of  its  use.  The  change 
involved  is  a  change  in  the  whole  structure  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. The  States  and  the  union  of  States  are  gone. 
The  result  is,  one  State,  one  vast  central  power,  a  repub- 
lic in  name  only.  This  fundamental  change  in  our  sys- 
tem of  Government  is  to  be  wrought  by  the  power  of  the 
sword,  without  action  of  States  or  people.  This  is 
the  inauguration  of  a  war  of  revolution  wholly  outside 
of  the  Constitution ;  a  war,  practically,  for  the  entire  sub- 
jugation and  permanent  conquest  of  fifteen  States:  for 
an  attempt  to  destroy  slavery  by  a  revolution  will  unite 
the  entire  South  against  it.  These  fifteen  States  must 
be  reduced  to  military  colonies,  and  held  in  subjection  by 
vast  standing  armies  and  by  vast  navies.  If  the  thing 
were  practicable,  it  would  be  at  the  cost  of  national  ex- 
haustion and  the  loss  of  our  own  freedom.  You  cannot 
maintain  your  conquest  over  fifteen  subject  States,  cover- 
ing so  vast  a  territory,  except  by  a  military  despotism. 
But  the  thing  is  impracticable.  Every  dollar  spent  for 
such  a  conquest  would  be  wasted ;  every  drop  of  blood 
shed  for  it  would  be  spilt  on  the  ground.  The  talk  of  a 
war  of  utter  extermination  is  mere  passion,  which  reason 
and  conscience  alike  condemn.  The  only  war  the  peo- 
ple desire  is  a  war  of  restoration.  If  we  go  beyond  this, 
we  embark  on  a  sea  of  strife  and  blood,  without  chart  or 
compass  ;  a  war  of  vengeance  and  hate,  of  carnage  and 
desolation,  physical  and  moral,  compared  with  which,  all 
we  have  seen  in  the  war  thus  far  are  ministrations  of 
mercy. 

18 


138  SPEECH   AT   CHELSEA. 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  It  is  my  firm  convic- 
tion, that,  in  the  prosecution  of  this  war,  the  power  of 
slavery  will  be  broken ;  if  the  war  shall  be  prolonged, 
utterly  broken.  Practically,  the  question  of  emancipa- 
tion is  one  of  possessio  pedis.  The  Union  army  will 
not  leave  slavery  behind  it.  Emancipation  will  not  pre- 
cede, but  follow  in  its  footsteps. 

Ponder  on  these  things,  fellow-citizens.  Stand  by  the 
Constitution ;  stand  by  the  Union  ;  stand  by  their  glorious 
emblem,  the  banner  of  our  love  and  pride.  Give  your- 
selves freely  to  the  service  of  your  country.  The 
thought  of  her  is  in  every  heart,  and  on  every  lip  ;  breaks 
into  prayer,  melts  into  tears,  kindles  into  flame  ;  the  last 
thought  at  night,  the  first  thought  of  morning:  our 
country,  perplexed,  but  not  in  despair ;  cast  down,  but 
not  destroyed ;  wrestling  with  adversity,  as  Jacob  with 
the  angel,  to  wring  from  it  its  blessing ;  veiled  and 
eclipsed  as  the  sun,  to  come  forth  again  with  life 
and  light  and  healing  in  its  beams.  Fellow-citizens,  at 
an  hour  of  such  extreme  peril  as  this,  principles  are 
every  thing ;  parties  and  individuals,  nothing.  I  have  not 
taken,  for  many  years,  an  active  part  in  politics.  My 
judicial  position  forbade  it.  I  have  had  no  direction  of 
the  "  People's  "  movement ;  but  I  believe  it  had  its  origin 
in  dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  condition  of  public 
affairs,  in  a  natural  and  wise  dread  of  any  attempt  to 
change  the  objects  and  purposes  of  the  war,  and  in  dis- 
trust of  political  cliques  who  have  used  the  party  in 
power  for  their  own  ends,  and  not  for  the  country's.  I 
cordially  approve  of  the  spirit  and  general  objects  of  this 
movement.  I  know  well,  and  respect  and  honor,  gentle- 


SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA.  139 

men  connected  with  it.  I  believe  their  apparent  objects 
are  their  real  objects.  Truer  men,  more  loyal  and  patri- 
otic, are  not  found  in  the  Commonwealth. 

They  are  conservative  in  their  views  ;  but  they  are  in 
favor  of  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war,  of  main- 
taining the  nation's  unity  at  every  cost,  and  of  cordially 
upholding  the  President  in  the  discharge  of  his  great  and 
difficult  duties.  They  cling  with  tenacity  and  unfalter- 
ing devotion  to  the  Union  and  the  Constitution  of  their 
fathers.  Mistakes  have  doubtless  been  made  ;  mistakes 
especially  which  show  an  ignorance  of  political  machi- 
nery and  management. 

"  Where  ignorance  is  bliss, 
'Tis  folly  to  be  wise." 

It  is  my  firm  conviction,  that  the  certain  result  of  the 
rigid,  prescriptive,  partisan  policy  adopted  by  the  Re- 
publican Convention,  especially  if  followed  up  by  the 
charge  of  treason  against  all  who  dissent  from  it,  is  a 
divided  North  ;  divided  not  as  to  the  duty  of  suppressing 
the  Rebellion,  but  so  divided  in  feeling  and  policy  as  to 
render  efficient  co-operation  impracticable.  I  pray  you, 
my  Republican  friends,  to  listen  to  the  voices  that  come 
to  us  from  the  Great  West,  and  to  be  tolerant  and  just. 
The  men  of  Massachusetts  cannot  be  driven.  They  will 
practise  forbearance  for  their  country's  sake,  but  not 
for  ever. 

To  what  condition  of  things  have  we  come,  fellow- 
citizens,  when  such  a  man  as  Josiah  G.  Abbott  can  be 
denounced  as  a  traitor,  and  this,  too,  as  he  stands  by  the 
fresh-made  grave  of  a  son,  dearly  beloved ;  one  of  three 
given  to  the  service  of  his  country  \  I  know  him  well. 


140  SPEECH    AT    CHELSEA. 

A  man  better  qualified  to  represent  you  cannot  be  found 
in  the  district ;  and  it  is  one  of  strong  men.  He  is  a 
very  able  lawyer ;  and  great  questions  of  law  will  have 
to  be  settled  by  the  next  Congress.  He  is  a  man  of 
thoroughly  practical  mind,  of  large  common  sense,  of  ex- 
tensive knowledge  of  men  and  business.  He  is  a  patriot 
through  and  through,  from  the  crown  of  his  head  to  the 
sole  of  his  foot. 

Nor  can  any  charity  excuse  or  palliate  the  gross  attacks 
made  upon  the  accomplished  and  gallant  standard-bearer 
of  this  movement.*  A  leader  at  one  of  the  ablest  bars  of 
the  State,  respected  and  beloved  by  his  brethren,  at  the 
first  call  of  his  country  he  gave  himself  to  her  service. 
Beginning  the  war  as  major  of  a  battalion,  he  has  been 
successively  appointed  colonel,  brigadier-general,  and  has 
now  command  of  a  division.  His  courage  and  gallantry 
have  been  tested;  his  ability  is  unquestioned,  his  cha- 
racter without  reproach.  How  Christian  gentlemen  can 
denounce  such  men  as  traitors,  it  is  difficult  for  a  plain 
man  to  comprehend. 

*  Gen.  Charles  Devens. 


141 


REMARKS  ON  THE  BORDER  'STATES. 


HOUSE  OF   REPRESENTATIVES,  JAN.  8,  1863. 


The  House  being  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  and  having  under 
consideration  the  Appropriation  Bill,  Mr.  THOMAS  said,  — 

Mr.  CHAIRMAN,  —  I  beg  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
Committee  back  to  the  precise  matter  before  us.  It  is 
a  provision  for  the  appropriation  of  money  for  a  definite 
and  specific  purpose :  that  purpose  is,  to  enforce  the  col- 
lection of  a  direct  tax  assessed  by  Congress  in  conformity 
to  a  provision  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
(art.  1 ,  sect.  2,  clause  4) ;  a  tax  which  could  only  have 
been  assessed  in  exact  conformity  to  that  provision. 
The  object  of  this  provision  in  the  appropriation  bill, 
and  of  the  law  of  the  last  session,  is  to  enforce,  in  the 
disaffected  States,  the  collection  of  the  tax.  Upon  what 
ground,  Mr.  Chairman,  are  we  seeking  to  enforce  this 
tax  in  the  "  seceded  "  States  ?  Upon  the  obvious  ground, 
that  the  authority  of  this  Government  at  this  time  is  as 
valid  over  those  States  as  it  was  before  the  acts  of  seces- 
sion were  passed ;  upon  the  ground,  that  every  act  of 
secession  passed  by  those  States  is  utterly  null  and  void  ; 
upon  the  ground,  that  an  act  legally  null  and  void  cannot 
acquire  force,  because  armed  rebellion  is  behind  it,  seek- 
ing to  uphold  it ;  upon  the  ground,  that  the  Constitution 
makes  us,  not  a  mere  confederacy,  but  a  nation ;  upon 


142  REMARKS    ON    THE    BORDER    STATES. 

the  ground,  that  the  provisions  of  that  Constitution  strike 
through  the  State  government,  and  reach  directly,  not 
intermediately,  the  subjects  of  the  United  States. 

Gentlemen  say  that  there  is  a  belligerent  power  exer- 
cising authority  against  us.  That  is,  you  say  that  rebel- 
lion is  attempting  revolution.  Very  well.  Who  ever 
heard,  as  a  matter  of  public  law,  that  the  authority  of  a 
government  over  its  rebellious  subjects  was  lost  until  that 
revolution  was  successful,  was  a  fact  accomplished  ? 
That  day,  I  pray  God,  I  may  not  live  to  see. 

My  position,  then,  Mr.  Chairman,  is,  that  we  may 
enforce  the  collection  of  this  tax,  because  to-day,  as  here- 
tofore, the  authority  of  the  National  Government  binds 
and  covers  every  inch  of  the  national  domain ;  because 
that  law,  which  we  call  the  Constitution,  is,  to-day,  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land.  If  the  position  taken  by 
the  learned  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Stevens] 
be  true,  that  we  are  every  day  passing  unconstitutional 
acts,  we  are  every  day  violating  our  oaths  to  support  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  I  beg  leave  to  say, 
that,  however  we  may  differ  as  to  the  extent  of  powers 
which  the  Constitution  gives  us  (and  they  are  ample  for 
all  good  ends),  when  we  deliberately  pass  from  fidelity  to 
this  Constitution,  to  enact  laws  in  violation  of  its  sacred 
provisions,  we  are  ourselves  inaugurating  revolution.  It 
is  fire  against  fire,  revolution  against  revolution  ;  and  God 
have  mercy  on  the  country  !  In  all  events,  at  whatever 
cost  or  peril  of  treasure  or  of  life,  we  must  cling  to  the 
national  unity;  and,  for  this  end,  we  must  cling  to 
the  only  possible  bond  of  unity,  the  Constitution. 

I  have  but  a  word  more  to  say,  Mr.  Chairman.     I  have 


REMARKS    ON   THE    BORDER    STATES.  143 

listened  quietly,  but  with  great  sorrow,  to  the  attacks 
often  made  on  the  Republican  side  of  the  House  against 
the  gentlemen  from  the  Border  States.  I  desire  to  say, 
what  I  have  often  said,  and  repeat,  with  the  fullest  sense 
of  my  responsibility,  that  in  fidelity  to  the  Union  and 
the  Constitution,  and  every  earnest  effort  to  uphold  them, 
there  have  been  no  truer,  nobler,  more  devoted  men 
than  these  representatives  from  the  Border  States. 
[Applause.]  And  the  great  heart  of  this  country  to-day 
goes  out  to  meet  them  and  to  bless  them.  It  is  easy  in 
New  England  (where  fortunes  are  rapidly  built  up,  and 
industry  quickened,  and  material  prosperity  advanced,  by 
this  war),  or  in  New  York,  or  in  Pennsylvania,  to  be 
patriotic  and  loyal  and  national.  These  men  have  stood 
the  touch  of  fire  and  the  sword.  They  have  been  tried 
by  suffering.  No  ties  of  natural  affection,  no  love  of 
kindred,  no  fear  of  desolation  or  death,  has  moved  them ; 
not  even  your  unkindness.  I  do  not  believe  that  it  is 
policy  or  wisdom  to  alienate  such  men  from  us :  we 
should  rather  grapple  them  with  hooks  of  steel  to  our 
hearts. 

Say  what  you  will,  Mr.  Chairman,  as  a  practical  ques- 
tion, this  war  must  be  fought  out  in  the  Border  States. 
They  constitute  the  battle-ground  of  this  contest  to-day, 
as  they  have  been  from  the  beginning  of  the  war.  Can 
you  hold  the  Border  States  to  their  allegiance  ?  If  you 
can,  the  final  victory  is  with  us ;  if  you  cannot,  separa- 
tion is  inevitable.  I  hope  and  trust  and  pray,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, that  we  shall  hear  no  more  of  party  discussions  and 
wrangles ;  no  more  reproaches  thrown  from  the  one  side 
of  the  House  to  the  other.  We  have  no  strength  thus 


144  REMARKS    ON    THE    BORDER    STATES. 

to  fritter  away.  God  knows,  we  need  a  united  people  to 
save  the  Union,  trembling,  even  now,  on  the  verge  of 
dissolution ;  and  therefore,  if  we  cannot  agree  upon  all 
questions  of  law,  if  we  cannot  agree  upon  all  questions 
of  policy,  let  us  consent  to  differ  as  we  best  may,  but 
with  the  firm  resolve,  that  every  thing  of  strength,  of 
power,  of  purpose,  of  motive,  of  will,  that  is  in  us,  shall 
combine,  concentrate,  converge,  to  save  the  national 
integrity,  the  national  life. 

It  has  been  said  by  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania, 
—  and  I  will  say  a  word  on  this,  and  relieve  your 
patience,  —  that  there  are  those  here  who  oppose  the 
policy  of  the  Administration.  I  suppose  there  is  no  man 
in  this  House  who  has  more  respect  for  the  intellectual 
vigor  and  manliness  of  the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania 
[Mr.  Stevens]  than  I  have ;  but  I  beg  leave  to  call  his 
attention  to  the  fact,  that  he  has  not  always  been  able 
to  concur  in  the  policy  of  this  Administration.  I  beg 
leave  to  remind  him  of  a  difficulty  which  has  occurred 
to  all  members  of  the  House,  that  it  has  sometimes  been 
very  difficult  for  even  a  very  careful  and  scrutinizing 
observer  to  know  or  find  out  what  the  policy  of  the 
Administration  is ;  *  and  we  are  obliged  to  grope  our 
way  darkly  therefore,  and  determine  for  ourselves  what 
will  be  for  the  peace  and  interest  of  the  country,  and 
follow  that.  If  the  Administration  does  not  clearly 
indicate  its  policy,  we  may  be  excused  for  not  being 
always  found  in  its  path ;  and,  when  indicated,  we  may 
not  follow  it,  if  fidelity  to  the  Constitution  or  the  highest 
interests  of  the  country  forbid. 


145 


ON    THE  BILL    "TO  RAISE  ADDITIONAL  SOLDIERS 
FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE   GOVERNMENT." 


HOUSE   OF   REPRESENTATIVES,  JAN.  81,  1863. 

I  HAVE  no  desire,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  launch  my  bark 
upon  the  sea  of  this  illimitable  debate.  My  object  in 
obtaining  the  floor  last  evening,  was  to  present,  in 
addition  to  a  few  remarks  upon  the  bill  before  the 
House,  some  considerations  concerning  the  relations  of 
New  England,  and  more  especially  what  has  been  called 
the  Puritanism  of  New  England,  to  the  Union.  But  I 
could  not  fail  to  see  that  this  subject  would  be  too  remote 
from  that  immediately  before  the  House.  I  propose, 
therefore,  to  confine  myself  to  a  few,  I  fear  some- 
what desultory,  suggestions  upon  the  measure  before 
us,  and  the  policy  which  it  involves. 

It  seems  to  me,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  discussion, 
thus  far,  has  scarcely  touched,  much  less  carefully  con- 
sidered, the  special  subject-matter  before  us.  This  bill 
proposes,  as  I  understand  it,  to  raise  a  new  and  large 
army  from  the  men  of  African  descent  in  this  country. 
The  amendment  offered  by  the  gentleman  from  Penn- 
sylvania [Mr.  Stevens]  to  the  original  bill  (the  measure 
to  be  pressed)  proposes  to  raise  that  army  without  limi- 
tation as  to  numbers ;  without  limitation  as  to  the  States, 
loyal  or  r,ebel,  from  which  they  are  to  be  taken ;  without 

19 


146  BILL    TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

limitation  as  to  the  expense,  because  without  limitation 
as  to  number ;  without  limitation  as  to  the  places  where, 
or  purposes  for  which,  the  army  is  to  be  used ;  without 
limitation  as  to  the  discipline  to  which  that  army  is  to 
be  subjected;  each  and  all  of  these  matters  resting 
solely  in  the  discretion  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States.  I  believe  that  I  shall  have  the  concurrence  of 
every  member  of  this  House,  and  of  the  gentleman 
from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Stevens]  among  the  rest,  when 
I  say,  that  this  bill,  in  its  new  form,  proposes  to  vest 
in  the  President  of  the  United  States  a  larger  power 
and  wider  discretion  than  were  ever  reposed  by  Con- 
gress in  the  hands  of  one  man,  unless  under  our  pre- 
vious legislation  on  the  same  subject.  I  am  not  here, 
Mr.  Speaker,  to  raise  the  question,  whether  we  may  not 
wisely  repose  a  large  discretion  in  the  Executive  at 
a  time  like  this.  It  is  among  the  necessities  of  our 
condition,  that  a  large  discretion  should  be  reposed  in 
the  Executive  ;  but  it  is  the  duty  of  Congress  to  see  that 
no  such  extent  of  power  is  vested  in  the  President,  or 
any  one  else,  that  that  power  may  be  readily  used,  as 
all  power  is  liable  to  be  used,  to  defeat  the  ends  for 
which  it  is  given,  to  subvert  instead  of  upholding  the 
laws.  And  this  question  is  not  one  of  the  individual 
character  of  the  officer,  but  of  principle  and  policy.  In 
what  condition  of  our  affairs  do  we  propose  to  raise  this 
new  army  ? 

If  I  understood  rightly  the  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Military  Affairs,  my  friend  from  New  York 
[Mr.  Olin],  we  have  now  in  the  field,  or  rather  we  have 
upon  the  pay-rolls  of  the  Government,  a  million  of 


FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT.     147 

white  men  of  the  Anglo-Saxon,  Celtic,  or  German  races. 
This,  no  man  can  doubt,  is  a  sufficient  army  for  the  pur- 
pose of  suppressing  this  Rebellion,  if  this  Rebellion  can 
be  subdued  by  physical  power  alone.  I  do  not  say  how 
many  of  those  men  are  engaged  to-day  in  active  service, 
in  face  of  the  enemy.  There  are,  we  are  told,  very 
large  desertions  from  the  army.  There  are  vast  num- 
bers now  on  your  pay-rolls,  capable  of  service,  who  are 
doing  no  service.  But  that  must  be,  to  a  considerable  ex- 
tent the  fault  of  the  administration  of  the  army.  It  is  the 
plain,  obvious  duty  of  the  Government  to  see  that  these 
men,  who  are  on  your  pay-rolls  and  capable  of  service, 
are  rendering  that  service.  With  a  million  efficient 
men  in  the  army  and  at  work,  and  with  our  large  and 
gallant  navy,  if  it  is  practicable  to  conquer  rebellion  by 
arms,  you  have  force  adequate  for  the  purpose;  as 
large  a  force  as  we  can  hope  to  maintain  and  replenish 
without  bankruptcy. 

We  must  look,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  the  financial  aspect 
of  this  question,  the  question  of  ways  and  means.  I  do 
not  think  the  financial  condition  of  this  country  has 
been  truly  presented ;  or  rather,  I  should  say,  fully  pre- 
sented :  for  no  gentleman,  of  course,  could  desire  to 
present  it  otherwise  than  truly.  If  I  understand  the 
facts  spread  by  the  gentlemen  of  the  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means  before  the  country,  in  the  speeches 
made  on  this  floor,  our  national  debt  at  the  end  of  the 
next  fiscal  year  will  be  at  the  least  two  thousand  million 
dollars.  By  that  debt  is  meant  the  liquidated  debt  of 
the  country.  I  would  call  the  attention  of  the  House 
to  the  fact,  that  the  unliquidated  debt  of  this  coun- 


148  BILL   TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

try,  the  debt  for  damages  for  the  taking  of  property 
and  the  destruction  of  property  by  the  military  power 
in  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  upon  any  equitable  or 
reasonable  rule  which  this  Congress  or  any  other  Con- 
gress may  adopt  in  its  adjustment,  may  reach  as  high  as 
five  hundred  millions  more.  This  may  be  possibly  too 
large  an  estimate ;  but  gentlemen  will  see  at  once,  that 
how  large  it  may  be,  and  whether  it  reaches  this  limit, 
must  depend  on  the  rule  which  Congress  shall  apply  to 
the  adjustment  of  those  claims ;  how  widely  the  door 
is  thrown  open.  If  we  admit  not  only  all  legal  claims, 
but  all  claims  that  are  equitable,  in  the  ordinary  sense 
of  that  word,  and  if  the  estimate  also  include  pensions, 
I  think  I  do  not  state  the  case  too  strongly  when  I  say 
it  would  reach  five  hundred  millions. 

Do  not  fail  to  observe  one  other  fact  of  our  financial 
condition  ;  and  that  is,  that  when  you  get  the  national 
debt  of  this  country,  liquidated  and  unliquidated,  you  do 
not  reach  the  whole  marrow  of  the  thing.  Your  state, 
county,  city,  town,  and  parish  debts  all  over  this  country, 
taken  together,  will  make  an  aggregate  approaching  at 
least  to  half  of  the  liquidated  national  debt  at  the  end 
of  the  present  fiscal  year ;  and  when  you  combine  these 
debts,  the  liquidated  debt,  the  unliquidated  debt,  the 
liability  for  pensions,  the  State,  county,  city,  and  town 
debts,  and  consider  also  how  much  higher  interest  we 
are  paying  than  that  paid  by  any  other  people,  the  fact 
will  stare  you  in  the  face,  that  this  nation,  at  the  end  of 
the  next  fiscal  year,  will  be  more  heavily  laden  with 
debt  than  any  nation  in  Europe. 

Now,  I  make  no  complaint  of  this,  Mr.  Speaker.     I 


FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT.     149 

would  not  withhold  nor  give  grudgingly  even  my  last 
dollar  to  the  prosecution  of  this  righteous  war ;  right- 
eous, if  prosecuted  for  the  ends  for  which  it  was 
begun, — the  noblest  war  this  country  could  wage  ;  com- 
pared with  which,  the  Revolution  itself  was  not  only 
on  a  small  scale,  but  for  ends  less  grand  and  moment- 
ous. I  differ  from  some  of  my  friends  here  as  to  the 
nature  and  object  of  this  war.  It  is  a  pleasant  thing  to 
say  this  is  a  war  for  liberty.  It  sounds  well ;  it  soothes 
the  ear  ;  it  stirs  the  blood :  but  it  is  not  true.  That  is 
not  the  fundamental  idea  of  this  war.  Liberty  we  have 
had,  sometimes  to  license.  The  fundamental  idea,  the 
idea  of  highest  moral  dignity,  in  the  prosecution  of  this 
war,  is  the  upholding  of  civil  order  and  law  and  the 
Constitution,  which  is  the  nation's  supreme  law,  its 
bond  of  unity,  and  its  breath  of  life ;  the  noblest  pro- 
duct of  human  thought ;  the  framework  of  an  empire 
capable  of  almost  infinite  expansion,  in  which  central 
power  was  reconciled  with  local  independence,  the 
gentlest  restraint  with  the  highest  security,  the  broadest 
equality  with  the  firmest  order,  the  amplest  protection 
with  the  slightest  burden.  The  thought  of  to-day  is 
not  liberty,  as  commonly  understood,  the  absence  of 
restraint ;  but  the  law  in  which  true  liberty  is  enthroned 
and  made  possible. 

I  repeat,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  do  not  groan  under  the 
burdens  the  country  has  been  and  will  be  called  to  bear 
in  the  just  prosecution  of  the  war.  It  may  be  (though 
that  question  is  now  one  of  history  only),  it  may  be, 
that,  by  early  mutual  restraint  and  by  moderate  counsels, 
the  war  might  have  been  averted.  But  it  was  not 


.150  BILL    TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

begun  by  this  Government.  After  the  first  shot  at 
Sumter,  it  was  an  inevitable  necessity,  a  war  of  self- 
defence.  I  am  yet  in  favor  of  vigorously  prosecuting 
the  war  until  the  ends  for  which  it  was  instituted  are 
attained,  or  their  attainment  clearly  seen  to  be  impos- 
sible. I  am  for  prosecuting  it  by  the  use  of  all  just 
means  and  instruments,  all  means  and  instruments 
which  have  the  sanction  of  public  law  as  it  has  been 
tempered  by  civilization  and  Christianity. 

But  to  the  money  aspect  of  the  question:  the  bill, 
without  disturbing  the  present  army  at  all,  without 
diminution  of  its  numbers,  authorizes  the  President  of 
the  United  States  to  enlist  one  hundred  thousand,  or  two 
hundred  thousand,  or  three  hundred  thousand  men  of 
African  descent ;  and  every  new  man  you  put  into  your 
army,  according  to  the  estimates  of  intelligent  gentle- 
men on  the  floor  of  this  House,  costs  you  from  seven 
hundred  to  a  thousand  dollars ;  and  if  you  raise  one 
hundred  and  fifty  thousand  men,  as  was  proposed  by 
the  gentleman  from  Pennsylvania  originally,  you  in- 
crease your  expenses  one  hundred  to  one  hundred  and 
fifty  millions  a  year. 

Mr.  STEVENS.  The  gentleman  will  allow  me  a  word. 
I  understand  him  to  say,  that  this  bill  proposes  to  raise 
an  additional  army,  without  any  diminution  in  the  num- 
ber of  the  present  army.  Now,  the  preamble  to  the 
bill  which  I  introduced  stated  expressly,  that  it  was 
upon  the  ground,  that,  within  a  few  months,  the  terms 
of  enlistment  of  several  hundred  thousand  of  the  troops 
now  in  the  field  would  expire ;  and  this  proposes  to 
supply  their  places. 


FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT.     151 

Mr.  THOMAS.  That  was  in  the  preamble  of  the 
original  bill  introduced  by  the  gentleman  from  Pennsyl- 
vania ;  but  the  bill  reported  as  from  the  War  Depart- 
ment, and  now  before  the  House,  has  no  such  provision. 
The  authority  vested  in  the  President,  according  to  his 
construction  of  our  statutes,  is  to  raise  an  army  of  a  mil- 
lion men.  I  do  not  complain  of  that  construction. 
There  is  no  provision  in  this  bill  for  the  diminution  of 
that  number  ;  and  that  number  is  not  to  be  diminished, 
at  any  rate,  until  June  next.  I  may  add,  a  bill  has  been 
introduced  in  the  other  end  of  the  Capitol  for  the 
recruiting  of  this  army,  and  supplying  its  losses. 

Mr.  Speaker,  let  me  now  turn  to  another  feature  of 
this  bill,  the  term  of  enlistment.  It  provides  for  the 
enlistment  of  men  for  a  period  of  five  years.  Why  five 
years'?  I  think  there  is  more  significance  in  that  word 
"  five  "  in  this  bill  than  in  all  other  words  written  in  it. 
Its  possible  objects  are  not  written.  Do  you  mean  to 
say  to  the  country,  that  it  is  your  expectation,  your  rea- 
sonable expectation,  and  the  basis  on  which  you  propose 
to  make  enlistments  for  your  army,  that  this  war  is  to 
continue  for  a  period  of  five  years  longer  ]  Do  you 
mean  to  say  to  the  country,  that  on  the  vast  scale  on 
which  the  war  is  now  prosecuted,  and  at  the  expense  of 
treasure  and  of  life  at  which  it  is  prosecuted,  you  expect 
to  carry  it  on  for  five  years  more  I  If  such  be  your 
expectation,  it  is  just  and  manly  to  say  so.  If  such  be 
not  your  expectation,  pray  add  nothing  to  the  anxiety 
and  alarm  of  the  people. 

Mr.  Speaker,  if  the  object  of  this  war  is  restoration, 
that  involves  a  state  of  things,  present  or  future,  which 


152  BILL   TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

will  soon  be  developed  and  felt.  A  war  for  restoration 
proceeds  upon  the  ground,  that  you  will  find  in  the 
rebel  States,  as  your  army  advances  and  protection  is 
made  possible,  men  who  are  ready  to  rally  again  under 
the  blessed  flag  of  the  Union,  and  to  return  to  their 
allegiance  to  the  National  Government.  If  that  feeling 
exists,  and  is  developed,  certainly  it  will  be  developed 
before  the  lapse  of  five  years ;  never,  indeed,  by  this 
instrumentality ;  never !  But  if  the  object  of  this  war 
is  not  restoration ;  if  the  purpose  and  object  of  this 
war  are,  as  is  sometimes  declared  in  the  heated  and 
brilliant  rhetoric  of  gentlemen  on  your  left,  subjuga- 
tion, extermination,  the  re-colonization  of  the  whole 
rebel  territory,  then  your  term  of  enlistment  is  alto- 
gether too  short,  altogether  too  short. 

If,  Mr.  Speaker,  the  object  be  extermination,  there 
is  not  one  of  these  pages,  snatched  prematurely  from 
his  mother's  arms  or  cradle,  who  will  live  to  see  the 
end.  You  have  been  waging  the  war  two  years,  and 
yet  the  number  of  inhabitants  in  the  rebel  States  to-day 
is  larger  than  it  was  when  the  war  was  begun.  You 
cannot,  probably,  if  you  would,  and  you  would  not  if 
you  could,  carry  on  a  war  with  a  fierceness  and  severity 
that  would  destroy  life  as  rapidly  as  it  germinates. 
Men,  in  war  even,  will  marry,  and  women  be  given  in 
marriage;  children  will  be  born  to  them,  and  their 
mothers  will  hold  them  to  their  flowing  breasts  as  the 
storm  sweeps  by.  The  angel  of  life  will  triumph  over 
the  angel  of  death.  Such  is  the  blessed  economy  of 
God.  The  extermination  of  eight  millions  of  people, 
with  the  use  of  all  our  power  and  all  our  resources,  is 


FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT.     153 

a  moral  and  physical  impossibility.  Of  this  war,  if  it 
is  carried  on  for  extermination,  neither  you  nor  I,  Mr. 
Speaker,  may  hope  to  see  its  close  but  in  one  way,  to 
us  the  way  of  deepest  humiliation,  —  the  intervention 
of  other  nations  to  stay  its  ravages.  Who  talks  of  a 
war  of  extermination  is  simply  mad. 

I  proceed,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  a  consideration  of  the 
material  of  which  you  propose  to  make  up  this  army. 
If  I  understand  myself,  I  entertain  very  little  prejudice 
and  no  unkindness  toward  the  colored  race.  I  may 
believe,  I  do  believe,  as. a  matter  of  fact,  that,  in  "the 
sterner  stuff,  they  are  an  inferior  race ;  in  some  of 
the  gentler  qualities,  our  superiors ;  and,  in  my  judg- 
ment, the  moral  condemnation  of  slavery  is  the  sterner 
for  that  fact.  I  have  more  respect,  or  rather  less  aver- 
sion, hate,  for  Koman  or  Grecian  slavery,  which  subdued 
equals  to  its  service,  not  inferiors ;  not  men  to  whom 
Nature  had  not  given  equal  power  of  self-reliance  and 
self-protection.  But  I  also  believe,  that  as  society  now 
exists,  where  these  races  are  brought  together  in  num- 
bers approaching  equality,  the  relations  that  will  exist 
between  them,  will  be,  perhaps  must  be,  to  some  extent, 
relation  of  dependence  and  pupilage  on  the  one  part, 
and  government  and  protection  on  the  other ;  but  not 
involving  necessarily  any  feature  of  chattel  slavery. 

Now,  I  do  not  enter  into  the  philosophy  of  races. 
As  a  practical  man,  I  take  and  deal  with  things  as  they 
are.  Looking  at  the  existing  relations  in  different  parts 
of  the  country  between  the  two  races,  I  believe,  after 
much  reflection  and  careful  consideration,  that  as  mat- 
ter of  wisdom,  for  the  good  of  both,  and  especially  for 

20 


151 

fel  v.;:-  •: -.  ••  -  _-  -  ••:  ::  :'_;  :•:"  T';-.:.  :-.  :.  "••;  ^  ".u  :  r.  ~: 
iftTnfre  that  xaee  m  this  war  if  we  can  fairly  avoid  it 
T*  aoaae  exfteat,  awl  fur  valmabfc  services,  they  have 
will  he  msed;  bat,  m  Aft  policy  off  creating 
and  large  anaies*  we  shall  lose  more 
They  wffl  %ht  by  &e  side  c£  their 
they  will  against  them.  This  maty 
seem  scranse  at  lirst  Uuslt ;  bct>  the  more  you  study  the 
African  character,  the  firmer  will  be  voter  convietBB.  «C 
d>  ••••keK.  The  fi^ht  which,  oar  history  gjres  as  is 
••Ur  «f  dbncs  fehtm?  with  their  masters ;  and  the 

•  w 

dct  wiH  be  feoni  to  be,  thoogh  not.  of  coarse,  without 
ito  esceptHMS.  that  slaves  are  attached  and  devoted  to 
and  their  families,  and  will  stand  by 
wiftk  and  for  them. 

there  are  mem  of  odor  in  this 
of  bearing   arms   and  Tnakrn.g   ^ood 
are  0101  of  talent  and  culture  among 
I  have  beard  a  man  of  color  in  this  country 
a  pafiahed  aneaiify  witk  a  beniy  of  styie,  and 
aC  avgavaeat..  which  any  gentleman  on  die  floor  of 
tfcis Hoose  awg&  be  equal:  which.  I  should 

imitate.     But.  Mr.  Speaker,  great  questions 
are  aot  detezmmed  rightly  on  excep- 
rather  tfoan  impair  the  rule. 

no  valuable  judgmenr  can  be  formed  as  to  the  «se- 
••f  rf *  hundred  thtfMHBilnen  firom 
wked  men  here,  or  fifty  men  diere. 
die  military  service,  and  had  bee& 
tl   question  m, 


1VB.  THE   SZBTKZ  OF  TBK  COTCXnOJrT.  i-S-5 


5    ^L    _        T  __    C*4  -  ^•^      ^^^L_A^      AA^^t- 

:      -  .   r  .._..:_-:  •         .        • 

yon  have   for  an  antr.   ocHHpazed  with 
material? 

My  fnend  from  Xe^r  York  >lr.BoKoeCo^d^] 
to  be  read 


nal  of  an  amiT.  as  apphed  to  Ae  t^aes  HK 


:-:.-  -        ; 

if  JMI  wffl,  -  a 


the  soMier  of 

^_^"_7^ 

history  of  don 

.    .      :-- 


in  the  desce  that 


hare  to  perform,  and  the 
Government;  just  in 

inspires  and 


-.:-.- :--  -  _.- 


to  Hie  in  banal  airs. 


156  BILL   TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

equal  number  of  young  men  from  one  of  our  cities,  of 
culture  and  spirit  and  pride,  and  you  would  have  at 
least  as  good  soldiers.  Nay,  more  :  if  you  were  to  take 
these  two  bodies  of  men,  and  cross  with  them  the  Rocky 
Mountains,  you  would  find  that  the  young  men  from 
the  city,  of  intelligence  and  spirit,  would  bear  all  the 
fatigues,  privations,  and  hardships,  as  well  as  the  stout- 
est woodmen ;  "  better,"  said  to  me  one  who  had  tried 
the  experiment,  —  Capt.  Williams,  of  the  Second  Mas- 
sachusetts Regiment,  one  of  the  many  noble  offerings 
Massachusetts  has  freely  laid  on  the  altar  of  country. 

Mr.  Hamilton  cites  the  authority  of  Frederick  of 
Prussia,  a  great  soldier  and  loose  talker :  yet  we  may 
concede,  that,  for  many  uses  to  which  armies  have  been 
put,  it  were  well  to  have  them  as  near  to  machines  as 
possible;  the  nearer  the  better.  Stupidity  might,  to 
some  extent,  be  compensated  by  unthinking  obedience 
to  the  will  of  the  commander.  Such  an  army  this 
country  does  not  seek,  and  will  not  have.  Create  an 
army  of  three  hundred  thousand  men,  so  stupid  as  to 
understand  nothing  of  the  purpose  for  which  the  war  is 
prosecuted ;  obedient,  but  obedient  only  to  the  will  of 
a  commander ;  mere  "  machines "  in  his  hands ;  and 
they  may  be  the  readiest  instruments  to  destroy  what  all 
good  men  are  struggling  to  preserve. 

For  one,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  do  not  object  to  the  enlist- 
ment of  intelligent  free  men  of  color,  though  I  doubt 
whether  they  seek  it.  I  am  a  citizen  of  a  State  which 
recognizes  the  substantial  equality  of  all  men  before 
the  law.  I  love  and  honor  her  for  her  fidelity  to  the 
cause  of  freedom,  though  I  may  sometimes  fear  "  she 


FOR  THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT.     157 

loves  not  wisely,  but  too  well."  I  thank  God,  there  is 
not  a  man  treading  the  soil  of  Massachusetts  who  is  not 
in  all  substantial  legal  rights  my  peer.  The  colored 
man  of  Massachusetts  is  as  much  a  citizen  of  Massa- 
chusetts as  I  am.  The  question  has  been  settled  from 
our  first  Constitution.  Nothing  is  clearer  as  matter  of 
principle  or  of  history  ;  nor  has  there  ever  been  any 
decision  of  the  courts  of  the  United  States  that  impairs 
his  right. 

But,  while  I  rejoice  in  the  policy  of  Massachusetts 
toward  the  colored  race,  I  do  not  assume  to  direct  or 
control  or  curse  the  policy  of  other  co-equal  States.  I 
am  not  unmindful  'of  the  fortunate  condition,  as  to  the 
colored  race,  in  which  the  Revolution  found  us.  I  am 
not  blind  to  the  fact,  that  their  numbers  were  so  small 
as  not  to  constitute  practically  a  disturbing  element.  I 
am  grateful  for  these  things :  but  I  am  not  sure,  that  if 
a  half  or  a  third  of  our  population  had  been  of  African 
descent,  and  our  soil  and  its  products  and  their  labor 
congenial,  we  should  have  been  so  much  wiser  and 
better  than  our  neighbors  ;  nor  am  I  certain,  that  if  we 
bordered  on  the  slave  States,  and  were  exposed  to  the 
incoming  of  large  numbers  of  black  men,  we  should  be 
so  tolerant  in  our  policy,  though  we  should  try  to 
be  just. 

I  do  not  form  my  judgment  from  the  relations  that 
exist  between  the  white  and  colored  races  in  Massachu- 
setts, of  those  that  must  and  should  exist  in  States  where 
the  colored  men  constitute  a  large  component  part 
of  the  population  ;  nor  do  I  form  a  judgment,  from  my 
knowledge  of  some  respectable  and  intelligent  colored 


158  BILL   TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

people  at  home,  what  sort  of  an  army  could  be  made 
up  of  the  slave  population  of  the  South.  Congress 
must  recognize  and  act  upon  facts  as  they  are,  and  not 
as  they  would  have  them  to  be.  It  must  make  large 
allowance  for  the  feelings  and  prejudices  even  of  the 
present  army;  yes,  for  the  blind,  unreasoning  preju- 
dices and  hostilities  of  color  and  of  race.  Other  gene- 
rations may  be  wiser,  better,  more  tolerant,  than  our 
own ;  but  we  have  to  deal  with  our  own. 

The  friends  of  this  measure  are  very  confident, 
they  are  rather  used  to  being  confident,  that  these 
black  men,  slaves  or  freed,  will  make  good  soldiers.  I 
cannot  aver  with  certainty,  they  will*not ;  but  I  can  say, 
we  have  no  satisfactory  evidence  that  they  will.  I  can 
say,  that  they  lack  the  intelligence,  the  energy,  and  the 
self-reliance  which  characterize  so  largely  our  present 
army,  and  which  all  men  have  conceded  to  be  the 
strength  and  effective  power  of  that  army. 

But  suppose  that  the  experiment  you  are  to  try  is 
not  successful.  Suppose  you  raise  an  army  of  two  or 
three  hundred  thousand  men  of  African  descent,  and 
you  find  that  the  capacity  is  not  in  them  which  free 
institutions  have  given  to  your  white  soldiers,  the  spirit 
and  habit  of  self-reliance  and  self-possession;  and  I 
may  remark  in  passing,  Mr.  Speaker  (I  suppose  there 
is  no  man  in  this  House  who  has  not  lived  long  enough 
to  have  learned  it),  that  the  great  difference  between 
men  in  this  world  is  the  degree  hi  which  they  possess 
themselves,  —  their  own  powers  and  resources.  Sup- 
pose, I  repeat,  that  your  experiment  should  fail,  and  you 
have  this  army  of  two  or  three  hundred  thousand  black 


FOR    THE    SERVICE    OF    THE    GOVERNMENT.  159 

men  on  your  hands :  what  will  you  do  with  them  I  If 
you  have  an  army  composed  of  the  white  citizens  of 
the  country,  and  the  period  of  their  service  expires, 
they  will  return  to  the  ordinary  relations  and  avocations 
of  life  and  business  ;  they  will  resume  their  former 
position  in  society.  They  are  soldiers  to-day :  they  are 
citizens  to-morrow.  But  an  army  of  two  or  three  hun- 
dred thousand  black  men,  freed  slaves,  to  be  disbanded, 
where  shall  they  go  1  To  what  place  and  condition 
are  they  to  be  returned  I  Of  course,  not  to  slavery. 
No  man  who  has  ever  served  under  our  flag,  whether 
for  a  day  or  for  an  hour,  can  be  made  again  a  slave. 
Where,  then,  shall  they  go]  You  may  be  willing  to 
colonize  them;  but  they  may  prefer  not  to  be  colonized. 
I  wish  some  practical  man,  who  is  disposed  to  discuss 
these  questions  upon  practical  grounds,  would  tell  me 
what  disposition  you  would  make  of  these  men,  if  the 
experiment  fails,  as  fail  I  believe  it  will ;  or  when  their 
term  of  service  has  expired. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  have  listened  attentively  to  this  debate. 
I  think  I  may  claim  the  merit,  if  I  have  no  other,  of 
being  a  very  patient  listener ;  and  it  sometimes  requires 
a  patience  which  Job  himself  would  envy.  But  every 
thing  affecting,  ever  so  remotely,  the  destiny  of  the  coun- 
try, is  of  painful  interest  now.  I  have,  with  pleasure 
for  the  most  part,  listened  to  this  discussion.  It  has 
concerned  great  principles  of  policy  and  of  conduct  in 
the  administration  of  our  affairs.  But  I  deeply  regret 
to  have  seen  the  spirit  of  party  so  often  invoked  in  this 
debate.  It  has  no  place  in  the  presence  of  these  great 
perils  and  great  duties.  The  utmost  freedom  of  discus- 


160  BILL   TO    RAISE    ADDITIONAL    SOLDIERS 

sion  and  of  counsel,  here  and  elsewhere,  must  be  main- 
tained. Principles  are  vital;  party  organizations  or 
triumphs,  individual  hopes  and  aspirations,  nothing. 
That  party  will  wear  the  crown  which  shall  do  most  to 
save  the  life  of  this  nation,  its  unity,  its  liberty  in  law. 
No  party  can  hope  to  triumph  which  is  not  faithful  to 
these  great  aims ;  unless  the  triumph  of  its  policy  and 
the  ruin  of  the  country  shall  be  cotemporaneous. 

I  heard  with  great  sorrow  the  thoughtful  and  elo- 
quent speech  of  the  gentleman  from  Kansas ;  but  I 
heard  it  with  no  surprise.  It  was  but  carrying  out  the 
principles  laid  down  in  his  speech  a  year  ago  to  their 
plainest  and  most  logical  conclusion.  The  principles 
were  received  with  cordial  sympathy  and  warmest  wel- 
come by  men  who  shrink  from  the  conclusion  as  from 
the  abyss  of  despair.  He  and  they  rejected  with  scorn 
the  old  Union,  any  Union,  with  slave  States.  The  only 
alternatives  were  revolution  and  permanent  conquest  of 
the  entire  South,  or  separation.  The  first  is  felt  to  be 
impossible ;  and  the  gentleman  from  Kansas  logically, 
and  I  have  no  doubt  honestly,  accepts  the  alternative. 
But  the  gentleman  cannot  fail  to  see  that  the  question 
before  the  country  to-day  is,  not  separation  or  no,  but 
disintegration  or  no ;  that,  the  moment  you  sever  the 
bond  as  to  one  State,  you  sever  it  as  to  the  whole.  No 
man  can  say,  if  separation  begins,  where  it  will  end,  or 
where  the  division-line  will  ultimately  fall.  Our  only 
safety  has  been  and  is  in  clinging  to  the  Union  as  it 
was  in  fact,  and  still  is  de  jure ;  the  old  Union,  the 
blessed  Union  of  our  fathers. 

It  has  been  clear  to  me  as  the  sun  in  heaven  and  at 


FOR   THE    SEEVICE    OF   THE    GOVERNMENT.  161 

mid-day,  that  this  was  our  only  possible  way  of  salva- 
tion. This  old  Constitution,  spurned  now  by  foot  even 
of  sciolist  and  charlatan,  this  stone  the  builders  of 
"  baseless  fabrics "  have  rejected,  must  again  become 
the  head  of  the  corner.  I  beseech  and  adjure  statesmen 
at  either  end  of  the  Capitol,  at  either  end  of  the  Ave- 
nue, to  continue  no  policy,  to  enter  upon  none,  which 
shall  preclude  the  restoration  of  the  Union,  with  the 
rights  and  powers  of  the  States  unimpaired;  the  only 
Union  now  within  the  reach,  even  of  hope. 

I  regret  deeply  some  of  the  measures  of  the  Ad- 
ministration. I  have  earnestly,  and  with  a  depth  of 
conviction  which  could  find  no  adequate  utterance, 
protested  against  them.  The  confiscation  bill,  the  pro- 
clamations of  Sept.  22d  and  24th  and  Jan.  1st,  power- 
less for  good,  have  been,  and  will  be,  I  fear,  fruitful 
only  of  evil. 

The  proclamation  of  Sept.  24th  is  in  conflict  with 
the  august  and  sacred  muniments  of  personal  secu- 
rity, to  which,  for  six  centuries,  the  Anglo-Saxon 
mind  and  heart  have  clung  as  the  gospel  of  civil  free- 
dom. Every  arrest  made  under  it  in  the  loyal  and 
peaceful  States  serves  only  to  strengthen  the  enemies  of 
the  Government,  and  to  wound  and  grieve  its  friends. 
If  they  tried  to  say  "Amen"  to  it,  the  amen  would  stick 
in  their  throats.  Pray,  let  it  sleep  "the  sleep  that 
knows  no  waking." 

The  proclamation  of  Jan,  1st  will  do  less  good  or 
harm  than  its  friends  hoped  or  opponents  feared.  It  is 
not  thus  that  great  wars  are  prosecuted  or  great  ends 

accomplished.     However  kind  may  have  been  the  mo- 

21 


16*5  KLL  TO 

of  those  who  begat  and  con  ceived  it,  it  was  still- 
no  political  galvanism  can  give  to  it  the 
of  life.  But  though  the  Administration 

to  stay  them,  and  protested  against  them.  I 
the  path  of  duty.  This  is  my  country  to  serve. 
my  Government  to  obey,  my  Constitution  to  rescue  and 
save,  mv  Union. 


n 

Amid  afl  the  darkness,  the  thick  daiimesft,  around  us.  I 
ding  to  the  single,  simple,  sublime  issue,  the  Constitn- 
-  i  ini  ':.-.  ":..--.  ::  ~i::i  ::  is  tie  "  :i.i.  :_ -v  :Ii 
Union.  God  bless  ffce  old  Union,  and  the  wrath  of  the 
Lamb  of  God  shrivel  to  their  very  sockets  the  arms 
lifted  m>  destroy  it; — not  in  vengeance,  but  in  mercy 
to  then  and  to  all  mankind! 

This  emmtry  of  oars,  tin*  mvinm  of  on,  m  the  gnumV 
tntst  that  was  ever  committed  into  human 
Pray  the  Father  of  lights,  we  be  faithful  My 
way  of  duty,  in  one  regard,  has  been  plain:  having 
sworn  to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
I  hare  striven  to  keep  the  oath.  The  way  of  obvious 
duty  was,  in  my  judgment,  the  way,  the  only  way,  of 
wisdom  and  ttleij  for  the  country. 

It  was  die  prayer  of  Xew  England's  greatest  states- 
man, that  when  his  eyes  were  turned  tor  the  last  time 
to  behold  the  foncjfheaveiL  he  might  not  see  him  shin- 
ing on  the  broken  and  dishonoied  fragments  of  a  once 
Union.  Have  we  ever  repeated  to  ourserres 
w<*d*»  *  o»«  glorious,"  "otux  glorious  Union"! 


Then  with  tears  let  us 
the  word,  and  write  "  for  mar  £  :-rn  out 

tribulation  into  a  nobler  life.  When  our  eyes  sh 
torn  to  behold  for  the  last  time  the  sun  in  hewnem.  • 
we  see  his  rays  Vmdlfng  every  star  sad  e%oy  stripe 
that  banner,  which,  Hke  the  robe  of  our  dhiae  1£ 
was  woven  withonl  seam ! 

If  we  save  this  Union,  generation  after  ge 
wiH  rise  up  to  bless  us.  If  we  lose  it  through  c 
through  party  strifes,  through  snpineness,  in 
other  ends,  our  memories  wiQ  rot 


164 


THE   LOUISIANA   ELECTION   CASES. 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  FEB.  16,  1863. 

Mr.  LSPF.AKF.R?  —  Whatever  other  differences  of  opinion 
there  may  be  between  members  of  this  House,  we  all 
recognize  the  great  importance  of  the  principles  and 
policy  involved  in  the  resolutions  before  us.  There  are 
certain  facts  that  are  not  contested.  It  is  not  contested 
in  the  report  of  the  Committee,  or  in  the  arguments  of 
the  members  of  the  Committee  of  Elections  who  did  not 
sign  the  report,  that  the  persons  who  are  elected  to  this 
House  are  loyal  men.  It  is  not  contested,  that  they 
were  elected  by  loyal  citizens  of  Louisiana.  It  is  not 
contested,  that  they  were  elected  without  military  dicta- 
tion or  control.  There  is  nothing  developed  in  the  report 
or  in  the  arguments  presented  to  the  House  to  show  that 
there  was  any  military  dictation  or  control  or  influence  in 
the  election. 

What  are  the  relations  which  these  electors,  and  the 
persons  who  claim  these  seats,  hold,  at  this  moment,  to 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  ?  They  are  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,  subject  to  all  the  duties  imposed 
by  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States.  They 
are  subject  to  taxation.  Since  the  ordinance  of  secession 
was  passed,  they  have  been  taxed,  in  conformity  to  the 
provision  of  the  Constitution  (art.  1,  sect.  2)  which  appor- 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  165 

tions  direct  taxation.  They  are  subject  to  your  revenue- 
laws.  Your  collector  is  there  to-day  collecting  duties 
imposed  by  the  Government.  They  are  subject  to  your 
excise-duties.  Your  law  passed  at  the  last  session  applies 
to  and  includes  them.  They  are  subject  to  military  ser- 
vice. Some  four  thousand  of  loyal  residents  of  New 
Orleans  are  already  engaged  in  the  military  service  of 
the  Government. 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  before  the  act  of  secession,  these 
men  had  all  the  political  rights  that  are  correlative  to 
these  political  duties.  They  had  the  right  of  representa- 
tion, which,  from  the  earliest  history  of  this  Government, 
has  been  indissolubly  connected  with  the  right  of  taxa- 
tion. Subject,  in  war  or  peace,  to  all  the  duties  and 
burdens  of  the  Government,  they  are  entitled  to  the 
corresponding  rights  and  privileges  that  Government  had 
conferred  upon  them,  unless  in  some  legal  way  deprived 
of  them.  These  propositions  are  too  plain  for  argument. 

I  proceed,  then,  Mr.  Speaker,  to  consider  whether 
these  rights  have  been  in  any  way  modified  or  impaired 
by  the  act  of  secession.  Were  they  impaired  by  the 
ordinance  passed  by  the  convention  of  Louisiana  1  It  is 
conceded  on  all  hands,  that  that  act  was  null  and  void, 
and  that  it  did  not  change  the  relations  which  the  State 
of  Louisiana  sustained  to  this  Union.  Is  that  act  of 
secession,  in  itself  null  and  void,  rendered  operative  and 
effective  by  the  use  of  physical  power  or  armed  force  ? 
Or,  to  state  the  proposition  in  another  form,  is  the 
ordinance  of  secession  rendered  effective  because  armed 
treason  is  behind  it?  Very  clearly,  no.  An  act,  void  in 
itself  under  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  cannot  be 


166  THE   LOOSLUU.   ELECTOR   CASES. 


to  affect  or  impair  the  legal  rights  of  any,  the 
itixen.  because  armed  treason  seeks  to  en- 
force it- 
Mr.  Speaker,  this  doctrine  is,  I  know,  contested;  but 
I  fenlare  to  say,  that  there  is  no  form  in  which  the  pro- 
poskkm,  that  the  teyeif^  States  have  committed  either 
«mr«A»  or  Ueaeou,  can  be  pot.  in  which  its  absurdity  is 
not  transparent  Thut  T  nrar  dn  im  iujusfiii  In  thr  idrn 
feata§  if  His  doctrine,  I  wffl  read  the  statement  ofitmsde 
by  my  distinguished  colleague  [Mr.  Etiot];  and  I  beg 
the  House  to  mark  die  force  and  effect  of  his  words.  He 
is  speaking  of  the  ordinance  of  secession ;  and  he  says, 


'BO  ifixt  bylaw,  jet  opentire  aad  Tkafixed  br  fabe 
.  of  law,  aad  by  efcetrre  and  eoBtroIIiBg  (ant  IB  fact,  it  IbQowed 


could  be 
the  State  could 


That  is  to  say,  the  proposition  of  my  colleague  is,  that, 
although  the  act  of  secession  is  roid  by  law,"  it  k  vital- 
ized by  a  fake  form  of  law,"  and  by  the  force  behind 
that  false  form  of  law.  I  may  be  rery  obtuse ;  but  I 
prefer  die  plainer  and  simpler  proposition,  that  an  act 
which  is  utterly  read  by  the  supreme  law  of  the  land 
cannot  be  vitalized  or  made  effective  by  armed  trfmlMi. 
but  is  void  stOL  -Vod  I  beg  leave,  with  all  doe  deference 
to  my  iiiliajaMii  1  colleague,  to  say,  that,  if  that  is  the 
p*opo«tion  which  he  told  as  the  other  day  a  majority  of 
sensible  men  of  Massaehosetts  before  in,  they  hare 


THE   LOUISIANA   ELECTION   CASES.  167 

done  great  injustice  to  the  foolish  men  of  Massachus-: 
[laughter] ;  for  they  have  robbed  them  of  their  appro- 
priate  food,  and  of  the  most   absurd  proposition  they 
could  find  to  belieTe  in  [laughter}. 

Mr.  ELIOT.     Will  my  colleague  yield  to  me ! 

Mr.  THOMAS.     With  pleasure. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  Mr.  Speaker.  I  was  somewhat  surprised 
the  other  day  to  observe  how  very  sensitive  my  distin- 
guished colleague  was  at  the  use  which  I  then  made  of 
the  word  ~  sensible."  But,  when  a  gentleman  states  that 
a  majority  of  sensible  men  are  of  a  certain  opinion,  it 
does  not  by  any  means  follow,  that  those  who  hold  the 
adverse  opinion  may  not  also  be  sensible.  My  learned 
colleague  must  not  suppose  that  I  intended  at  all  to  place 
him  in  the  category  of  those  who  were  not  sensible, 
certainly  not;  but  only  among  the  minority  of  sensible 
men  [laughter].  My  learned  colleague  is  as  sensible 
as  any  of  those  who  differ  from  him,  I  should  be  the 
last  man  to  take  from  him  any  claim  which  he,  certainly 
with  some  sensitiveness,  seems  to  assert,  that  he  belongs 
to  a  sensible  party.  In  Massachusetts.  I  am  glad  to 
believe,  it  is  a  party  in  the  minority,  although  there  ate 
in  it  very  sensible  gentlemen. 

Mr.  THOMAS,  I  cannot  yield  the  floor  to  a  speech. 
If  my  colleague  desires  to  ask  a  question  or  to  make  an 
explanation.  I  have  no  objection. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  I  am  endeavoring  to  make  an  explana- 
tion ;  and  I  began  on  that  point  because  my  colleague 
has  been  so  very  sensitive.  Two  or  three  times  he 
referred  to  it  as  though  I  intended  to  intimate  that  he 
and  the  People's  party  in  Massachusetts  were  not 


168  THE    LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

ble.  Far  be  it  from  me  to  say  that  they  are  not  sensible 
men.  In  that  particular,  however,  I  think  they  are 
decidedly  in  the  minority  ;  and,  so  far  as  the  questions 
are  concerned  that  divided  the  People's  party  from  the 
great  body  of  men  in  Massachusetts  last  fall,  I  cannot, 
from  my  stand-point,  believe  that  they  were  as  sensible 
as  I  hope  my  learned  friend  will  be  when  he  comes  next 
to  the  polls. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  cannot  yield  the  floor  to  my  colleague 
to  make  a  political  speech. 

Mr.  ELIOT.     My  colleague  must  keep  good-natured. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  It  is  not  surely  a  question  of  good 
nature.  Mine  is  not  easily  exhausted;  but  I  desire  to 
proceed  with  my  remarks.  I  do  not  desire  to  hear  a 
talk  about  the  People's  party  or  any  other  party.  Graver 
matters  are  before  us. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  Does  my  friend  decline  to  yield  the 
floor? 

Mr.  THOMAS.  For  a  political  speech,  I  must.  If  my 
colleague  has  any  explanation  he  desires  to  make,  I  will 
yield  for  explanation ;  but  I  cannot  yield  for  a  speech. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  I  desire  to  make  an  explanation.  Mr. 
Speaker,  I  do  not  know  whether  that  phrase,  "  State 
suicide,"  originated  in  this  House  or  in  the  other  branch 
of  Congress.  It  is  not  a  phrase  that  to  my  mind  conveys 
a  clear  and  distinct  state  of  facts.  I  have  never  used  it. 
My  learned  colleague  has  attributed  it  to  me.  I  repeat, 
I  have  never  used  it.  I  have  entertained  the  idea,  and 
now  entertain  a  distinct  idea,  of  what  I  have  called 
State  treason.  I  had  the  honor  to  speak  upon  that 
subject  last  summer ;  and  it  was  in  the  course  of  that 


THE    LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  169 

speech  that  I  stated,  more  at  large  than  I  can  now 
do,  what  seem  to  me  to  be  the  true  doctrines  on  that 
subject. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  cannot  yield  the  floor  and  my  time 
for  this  discussion. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  It  takes  some  little  time  to  explain  iny 
point. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  do  not  desire  to  give  up  my  time  for 
discussion  upon  this  question,  and  I  must  decline  further 
to  yield  the  floor. 

Mr.  ELIOT.     Very  well :  then  I  will  just  say 

The  Speaker  pro  tempore.  The  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts  is  not  in  order.  His  colleague  declines 
to  yield  the  floor. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  My  colleague  yields  to  me,  as  I  under- 
stand, to  finish  this  statement. 

The  Speaker  pro  tempore.  Does  the  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts  yield  the  floor1? 

Mr.  THOMAS.  For  my  colleague  to  finish  what  he 
was  saying  at  the  moment. 

Mr.  ELIOT.  When  a  State  has  done  what,  under  the 
language  of  the  Constitution,  amounts  to  treason ;  when 
it  has  given  aid  and  comfort  to  the  enemy ;  when  it  has 
levied  war  against  the  Government ;  when  its  Governor 
has  abdicated,  its  Legislature  gone  over  to  the  enemy ; 
when  it  has,  by  all  the  forms  of  law,  arrayed  itself 
against  the  Government ;  I  say,  that  State  has  committed 
treason,  and  that,  as  such,  it  has  forfeited  all  its  rights  as 
a  State,  leaving  the  loyal  men  of  the  State  to  be  cared 
for  and  protected  by  the  Government.  But  I  repeat, 
that,  as  a  corporation,  it  has  committed  treason,  and  has 

22 


170  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION   CASES. 

forfeited  all  its  rights  under  the  Government  as  a  traitor 
State. 

Mr.  THOMAS.     Is  this  all  my  colleague  has  to  say  ? 

Mr.  ELIOT.  Just  to  finish  the  sentence.  And  may 
be  declared  by  the  Government  as  having  forfeited  all 
its  rights  and  privileges  as  a  State. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  The  doctrine,  then,  is,  that  a  State 
cannot  hang  itself,  but  may  put  itself  in  a  state  of  prepa- 
ration to  be  hanged. 

Mr.  ELIOT.     It  deserves  to  be  hanged. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  It  can,  of  course,  be  arraigned  for 
treason ;  it  can  be  indicted  for  treason,  brought  to  trial 
before  a  jury  of  its  peers  for  treason,  and  hung  for  trea- 
son [laughter].  The  statement  well  illustrates  what 
I  have  before  stated,  that  there  is  no  form  of  words  into 
which  you  can  put  this  doctrine  that  its  absurdity  will 
not  be  transparent.  The  proposition  commits  suicide, 
not  the  State.  It  is  felo  de  se.  A  State  cannot  commit 
treason ;  nor  can  the  void  act  of  a  State  change  the  rela- 
tion which  loyal  citizens  sustain  to  the  United  States  ; 
nor  are  the  relations  which  loyal  and  obedient  citizens 
sustain  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States  broken 
or  severed  because  the  ordinances  of  secession  are 
backed  up  by  traitors  in  arms.  These  citizens  of  Louisi- 
ana, therefore,  hold  the  same  legal  relation  to  the  United 
States  that  they  did  before  the  acts  of  secession  and 
treason,  by  men  wearing  the  garb  of  State  authority, 
were  committed. 

The  State  of  Louisiana  exists ;  its  functions  may  be 
in  abeyance.  All  the  powers  of  the  State  exist ;  and  all 
that  is  necessary  is  simply  that  the  machinery  of  the 


THE   LOUISIANA   ELECTION    CASES.  171 

State  shall  be  put  in  motion.     The  State  itself  is  like 
Milton's  angels,  which, 

"  Vital  in  every  part, 
Cannot  but  by  annihilating  die." 

This,  then,  Mr.  Speaker,  is  the  state  of  things  before 
us :  The  loyal  men  of  these  two  districts  of  Louisiana, 
holding  unbroken  their  legal  relations  to  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  have  elected  representatives 
to  this  Congress  of  the  United  States ;  and  the  question 
is,  Shall  they  be  admitted  ?  If  not,  why  not  ?  An  objec- 
tion has  been  made,  though  not  much  pressed,  that  there 
were  no  vacancies  to  fill.  Vacancies  existed  by  reason 
of  the  failure  to  elect  at  the  general  election,  and  those 
vacancies  have  never  been  filled.  There  is  no  one  occu- 
pying a  seat  hi  this  House  from  either  of  these  two 
districts,  because  there  have  been  no  persons  entitled  by 
law  to  fill  either  of  them.  A  case  arose  in  which  vacan- 
cies should  be  filled  in  pursuance  of  writs  issued  by 
executive  authority  of  the  State  of  Louisiana.  Were 
they  so  issued? 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  this  question  is  free  from 
difficulty :  it  certainly  is  not.  But  it  has  been,  I  think, 
quite  too  summarily  disposed  of  by  gentlemen,  opposed 
to  the  resolutions  of  the  Committee.  It  seems  to  me, 
Mr.  Speaker,  that  much,  very  much,  of  the  difficulty  we 
have  in  the  discussion  of  this  and  similar  questions, 
results  from  the  attempt  to  apply  to  the  condition  of 
things  in  which  we  are  placed,  principles  and  rules  from 
writers  upon  international  law  that  really  throw  no  light 
upon,  and  have  no  just  application  to,  that  condition,  in 
many  respects  sui  generis  ;  and  for  our  guide  in  which, 


172  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

history  and  public  law  furnish  no  precedents  or  even 
strong  analogies.  No  just  or  reasonable  conclusion  can 
be  drawn  from  the  powers  of  a  military  governor,  in  a 
territory  conquered  from  a  foreign  enemy,  as  to  the 
nature  and  extent  of  the  powers  to  be  exercised  in 
States,  or  parts  of  States,  rescued  from  the  possession  of 
rebels  in  arms  against  us.  This  is  a  military  occupation 
of  our  own  territory ;  an  occupation  which  has  become 
necessary  by  reason  of  the  fact,  that  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  the  United  States  cannot  otherwise  be  enforced ; 
and  that  it  is  our  duty  to  enforce  them,  and  the  right  of 
the  loyal  citizens  of  Louisiana  to  have  them  enforced, 
not  merely  for  our  benefit,  but  for  their  protection. 

Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  what  is  the  object  of  this  vast 
movement  of  ours  ?  For  what  are  we  carrying  on  this 
war]  For  the  purpose  of  enforcing  the  laws  of  the 
United  States.  Your  war  has  no  other  just  or  legiti- 
mate object  but  the  enforcement  of  your  laws.  If  these 
laws  are  obstructed  by  armed  force  in  the  State  of 
Louisiana,  you  have  the  right  to  take  and  to  maintain 
military  occupation  of  that  State  to  remove  such  obstruc- 
tion. You  have  the  right  to  see  that  the  laws  of  the 
United  States  are  executed  in  the  State  of  Louisiana. 

Do  gentlemen  say,  that,  because  of  the  existence  of 
armed  rebellion  in  the  State  of  Louisiana,  we  have  no 
right  to  enforce  the  laws  of  the  United  States  there  I 
Have  not  we  the  right  to  collect  taxes  I  Have  we  not 
the  right  to  enforce  the  revenue-laws,  and  the  right  to 
conscript  soldiers  from  the  citizens  of  that  State  ?  Have 
you  not  the  right,  by  military  power,  to  protect  the 
courts  of  the  United  States  in  the  district  of  Louisiana 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  173 

in  the  exercise  of  their  jurisdiction'?  I  take  this  po- 
sition, and  I  fail  to  see  how  it  can  be  controverted, 
that  if  you  are  in  the  military  occupation  of  this,  your 
own  territory,  you  hold  it  for  the  purpose  for  which  the 
war  is  waged ;  for  the  purpose  of  upholding  the  jurisdic- 
tion, and  enforcing  obedience  to  the  laws,  of  the  United 
States. 

The  analogies  sought  to  be  drawn  from  Vattel,  or 
other  writers  on  public  law,  as  to  the  military  occupation 
of  a  conquered  territory  from  a  foreign  State,  have  very 
imperfect  application  to  the  case  before  us.  The  Consti- 
tution and  the  laws  of  the  United  States  are  the  supreme 
law  of  Louisiana,  and  you  are  to  enforce  the  execution 
of  those  laws ;  and  I  see  no  valid  distinction  between 
enforcing  those  laws  which  impose  duties  and  burdens 
upon  the  people,  and  the  enforcement  of  those  laws 
which  guarantee  and  protect  the  rights  of  the  loyal  people 
of  the  State ;  rights  springing  from  us,  and  to  be  pro- 
tected by  us. 

Mr.  CONWAY.  Was  the  law  under  which  these  men 
were  elected  a  law  of  the  United  States? 

Mr.  THOMAS.  The  law  from  which  the  right  to  elect 
was  derived,  and  to  be  elected,  was  a  law  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  supreme  law  of  Louisiana.  Mr.  Speaker, 
I  wish  to  make  matters  clear  as  I  go.  I  want  gentlemen, 
who  believe  that  we  should  enforce  the  laws  of  the 
United  States  for  the  collection  of  taxes  and  the  collec- 
tion of  the  revenue  in  Louisiana,  to  point  out  the  dis- 
tinction between  enforcing  the  laws  of  the  United  States 
which  impose  these  burdens  and  duties  upon  the  people, 
and  the  enforcing  of  the  laws  which  secure  to  them  the 


174  THE    LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

enjoyment  of  their  rights  and  privileges  under  the  Con- 
stitution, and  especially  this  great  and  invaluable  right 
of  representation,  of  helping  to  make  the  laws  which 
they  are  bound  to  obey.  Our  duty  to  protect  is  as  clear 
as  their  duty  to  obey.  They  are  reciprocal  and  inter- 
dependent. 

We  may  meet  this  question  of  the  issue  of  writs  of 
election  in  another  manner.  The  question,  whether 
these  writs  were  properly  issued  or  not,  is  a  technical 
question,  and  we  can  meet  it  by  a  technical  answer. 
We  may  meet  the  .objection,  that  the  writs  were  not 
issued  by  the  executive  authority  of  the  State,  by  saying 
that  they  were  issued  by  the  only  executive  authority  of 
that  State  which  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
or  the  people  in  these  districts  in  any  way  recognize, 
and  which,  in  matters  of  highest  concern,  they  have 
recognized  and  obeyed.  The  writs  of  election  were,  in 
fact,  issued  upon  the  earnest  request  of  the  loyal  citizens 
of  these  districts,  and  were  responded  to  and  confirmed 
by  them. 

But  I  do  not  consider  the  strict  legality  of  these  writs 
vital  to  the  issue  before  us.  I  go  one  step  further.  I 
contend,  whether  these  writs  were  issued  by  the  execu- 
tive authority  of  the  State  or  not,  this  may  be  a  valid 
election.  I  contend,  that  this  provision  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, as  other  provisions  of  statute  in  relation  to  this 
subject,  is  within  the  well-settled  distinction  between 
provisions  which  are  directory  and  those  which  are 
essential.  I  say,  under  the  law  of  elections,  practised 
upon  from  the  beginning  of  the  Government  to  this 
hour,  you  have  gone  behind  the  mere  form  to  get  at  the 


THE  LOUISIANA    ELECTION   CASES.  175 

substance  and  truth  of  the  thing ;  and  that  these  safe- 
guards, provided  by  the  laws  to  secure  to  the  citizens 
the  orderly  exercise  of  the  right  of  election,  were  never 
intended  to  be  used  as  barriers  to  exclude  them  from 
their  enjoyment.  Let  me  call  the  attention  of  the  House 
to  elections  whose  validity  this  House  has  recognized, 
and  which  proceed  upon  this  distinction. 

Mr.  PORTER.  If  I  understand  the  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts,  he  asserts,  that,  there  being  no  Governor 
of  Louisiana  elected  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of 
her  constitution  and  laws,  the  military  commandant 
appointed  by  the  President,  who  has  assumed  the  title 
of  Military  Governor,  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  Governor 
or  executive  authority  of  the  State  within  the  meaning 
of  that  clause  of  the  Federal  Constitution  which  pro- 
vides, that,  in  case  of  vacancies  in  the  representation  of 
a  State,  the  "  executive  authority  thereof"  shall  issue 
writs  of  election. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  do  not  state  the  proposition  so 
broadly  as  that.  What  I  have  said  is,  that  we  are  in 
the  military  occupation  of  our  own  territory,  a  portion 
of  it  where  the  laws  of  the  United  States  have  been 
impeded  by  armed  force ;  that  we  are  there  to  enforce 
the  laws  of  the  United  States ;  and  that  it  is  difficult  to 
draw  a  sound  distinction  between  the  powers  effective 
for  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  imposing  burdens  and 
duties  upon  the  subject,  and  those  which  may  be  used 
for  his  protection.  The  gentleman  is  mistaken  in  his 
facts.  Mr.  Shepley  did  not  assume  the  title  of  Military 
Governor.  He  was  appointed  Military  Governor  by  the 
President. 


176  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

Mr.  PORTER.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  gentleman  is 
at  fault  in  saying  there  is  any  law  of  the  United  States, 
so  far  as  relates  to  the  election  of  representatives  in 
Congress,  to  be  enforced.  The  Constitution  says, 

"  The  times,  places,  and  manner  of  holding  elections  for  senators 
and  representatives  shall  be  prescribed  in  each  State  by  the  Legisla- 
ture thereof;  but  the  Congress  may  at  any  time,  by  law,  make  or 
alter  such  regulations,  except  as  to  the  places  of  choosing  senators." 

When  Congress  shall  have  passed  a  law  prescribing 
the  time,  place,  and  manner  of  electing  representatives, 
then  the  military  power  may  be  invoked  to  remove 
obstructions  in  the  way  of  carrying  it  into  practical 
effect. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  The  provision  of  the  Constitution  cited 
by  my  friend  from  Indiana  is  the  one  referring  to  the 
general  elections  of  representatives,  and  not  to  the 
elections  to  fill  vacancies.  It  is  by  no  means  clear  that 
any  legislation  of  Congress  could  remove  the  difficulty. 
In  case  of  vacancies  in  the  delegation  of  any  State,  the 
Constitution  says  "  the  executive  authority  thereof  shall 
issue  writs  of  election  to  fill  such  vacancies."  The 
legislation  of  Congress  cannot  supersede  or  modify  this 
provision;  and  after  legislation,  as  before,  the  same 
questions  would  arise  as  now.  Is  there  an  executive 
authority  of  the  State,  within  the  meaning  of  this  provi- 
sion^ Is  it  sufficient  that  the  writ  is  issued  by  one 
claiming  to  exercise  the  executive  authority,  with  the 
recognition  of  this  Government  and  with  the  assent  of 
the  people  \  Or  is  it  our  duty  to  go  behind  his  certifi- 
cate and  action,  and  inquire,  in  a  case  where  there  is  no 
conflicting  claim  or  contest,  as  to  the  regularity  of  his 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  177 

appointment?  And  lastly,  supposing  that  we  were 
satisfied  the  authority  was  not  regular;  yet  if  a  day 
was  fixed,  was  known  to  all  the  voters,  and  the  case 
shows  they  complied  with  the  notice,  and  exercised  the 
right  of  election  fully  and  freely,  must  we  or  ought  we 
to  declare  the  election  void  because  the  authority  issuing 
the  writ  was  not  regular  ? 

Mr.  PORTER.  The  learned  gentleman  will  see  to 
what  a  dangerous  conclusion  his  argument  must  neces- 
sarily lead  him.  The  Constitution  provides,  that,  "  when 
vacancies  happen  in  the  representation  from  any  State, 
the  executive  authority  thereof  shall  issue  writs  of  elec- 
tion to  fill  such  vacancies."  There  is  also,  however, 
another  provision  as  to  senators,  that,  "  if  vacancies 
happen  by  resignation  or  otherwise  during  the  recess 
of  the  Legislature  of  any  State,  the  executive  thereof 
may  make  temporary  appointments  until  the  next 
meeting  of  the  Legislature,  which  shall  then  fill  such 
vacancy."  The  same  words,  "  executive  thereof,"  are 
employed  in  both  cases ;  so  that,  from  the  argument 
of  the  gentleman,  it  must  necessarily  follow,  that  the 
military  governor  appointed  by  the  President  may  fill 
vacancies  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  Surely 
no  one  would  be  willing  to  allow  such  an  exercise  of 
power. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  I  do  not  think  such  a  conclusion 
necessarily  or  legitimately  follows.  There  is  a  broad 
distinction  between  the  exercise  of  an  official  and  judicial 
judgment  in  selecting  a  senator,  and  the  exercise  of  a 
power  in  appointing  a  day  for  the  people  to  select  their 
own  representatives.  It  has  not  been  the  uniform  prac- 

23 


178  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

tice  of  the  House  to  hold  that  these  writs  shall  be  issued 
by  the  executive  authority  of  the  State.  I  call  attention 
to  the  fact,  that  gentlemen  have  been  allowed  to  take, 
and  now  hold,  seats  upon  this  floor,  under  the  acts  of  the 
Provisional  Convention  and  Governor  of  Virginia.  I  call 
attention  also  to  the  fact,  that  uniformly  elections  have 
been  held  in  the  Territories  before  their  admission  as 
States  into  the  Union,  and  where,  therefore,  the  elections 
were  held  without  the  action  of  State  authorities. 

Mr.  PORTER.  I  would  suggest  to  the  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts,  that  that  power  has  been  exerted  solely 
under  the  third  section  of  the  fourth  article  of  the  Consti- 
tution, providing  that  "new  States  may  be  admitted  by 
the  Congress  into  this  Union."  That  clause  has  been 
interpreted  to  include  the  right  to  have  all  the  officers 
at  the  time  of  admission  necessary  to  represent  the  State 
in  the  Federal  Congress. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  Be  it  so ;  but  that  provision  does  not 
abrogate  the  other  provision  of  the  Constitution,  which 
provides  that  the  times  and  places  for  elections  shall  be 
fixed  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State.  The  practice 
bends  the  form  to  the  substance.  The  House,  by  a 
large  majority,  during  the  present  term,  determined  that 
an  election  held  at  a  time  not  fixed  by  the  Legislature 
of  the  State,  but  in  the  constitution  of  the  State,  was  a 
valid  election,  though  clearly  a  departure  from  the  letter 
of  the  law. 

The  point  to  which  I  was  endeavoring  to  lead  the 
House  is  the  distinction  between  those  provisions  formal 
and  directory  and  those  that  I  deem  essential ;  and  that 
the  House,  in  the  exercise  of  its  power  to  judge  of  the 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  179 

elections  and  the  returns  of  its  members,  has  always  felt 
itself  enabled  to  go  behind  the  "  letter  which  killeth  to 
the  spirit  which  maketh  alive,"  and  to  ascertain  whether, 
in  point  of  fact,  there  has  been  a  fair  election  by  the 
people  of  the  district,  having  full  opportunity  to  vote, 
and  without  violence  or  fraud.  And,  therefore,  if  gentle- 
men differ  as  to  the  authority  of  a  military  governor, 
or,  as  I  would  call  him,  the  provisional  governor,  of  a 
State,  they  may  still  be  satisfied  that  there  was  a  full  and 
fair  notice  to  the  people  of  the  election;  and  that  the 
loyal  people  of  those  districts,  having  had  such  full  and 
fair  notice,  did  meet  and  freely  exercise  then:  elective 
franchise. 

I  beg  leave  to  make  this  further  obvious  suggestion  to 
the  House:  that  you  cannot  expect,  in  districts  like 
those  in  Louisiana,  or  in  any  other  of  the  States  whose 
citizens  have  been  in  arms  against  us,  that  regularity,  or 
that  adherence  to  the  forms  of  law,  which  you  may  justly 
demand  in  a  State  where  the  operation  of  the  laws  has 
not  been  obstructed  by  force  of  arms.  Irregularities  are 
inevitable  ;  and  this  House,  under  its  power  to  determine 
the  election  of  members,  will  see,  not  whether  all  the 
customary  provisions  of  law  have  been  complied  with, 
but  whether,  in  point  of  fact,  there  has  been  a  fair  and 
just  election.  Do  sticking-in-the-bark  gentlemen  tell  us 
the  registry  law  was  not  complied  with,  and  that,  there- 
fore, this  election  is  void?  It  is  a  fact,  that  this  provi- 
sion for  a  registry  law  for  New  Orleans  was  embodied  in 
the  constitution  of  Louisiana  adopted  in  1852.  It  is  also 
a  fact,  that  there  were  two  elections  of  representatives 
from  New  Orleans,  of  members  admitted  to  seats  in  this 


180  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

House,  before  any  registry  law  had  been  passed.  And 
upon  what  ground  ?  Upon  the  plain  ground,  that  you  are 
not  to  deprive  the  electors  of  the  exercise  of  this  most 
important  right  of  representation  because  there  is  a 
failure  to  comply  with  formal  provisions  of  law.  Sup- 
pose, for  instance,  the  law  required  a  check-list,  and  a 
check-list  was  not  used  in  the  election,  and  yet,  upon 
a  full  investigation  of  the  facts,  the  House  is  satisfied  a 
man  was  elected  by  a  clear  majority,  and  without  fraud 
or  violence :  there  can  be  no  question,  that,  under  the 
power  vested  in  the  House,  it  would  look  directly  to  the 
merits  of  the  election,  and  confirm  it. 

The  distinguished  gentleman  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Voor- 
hees],  who  first  spoke  upon  this  subject,  averred  that 
there  was  great  danger  from  the  admission  of  these 
claimants,  and,  in  like  cases,  that  the  executive  authority 
of  this  Government  would  finally  prevail  over  the  rights 
and  powers  of  the  House.  The  answer  to  all  such  sug- 
gestions is  to  be  found  in  the  fidelity  of  this  House  to  its 
rights,  to  its  powers,  and  to  its  duties  ;  and,  without  such 
fidelity,  there  can  be  no  safety.  It  is,  in  all  cases,  the 
first  and  final  and  only  judge  of  the  qualifications, 
elections,  and  returns  of  its  members  ;  and  so  long  as  it 
holds  that  power  in  its  right  hand,  and  exercises  it  dis- 
creetly, firmly,  fearlessly,  we  need  have  no  fear  of  the 
Executive. 

The  same  gentleman  suggests,  that  this  .was  not  a  free 
election,  because  the  persons  who  voted  at  the  election 
voted  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  the  effects  of  the  pro- 
clamation of  the  President  of  the  United  States  ;  or,  as 
the  proclamation  of  the  military  governor  somewhat 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  181 

curiously  terms  it,  to  avail  themselves  of  the  "  benefits  " 
secured  by  the  proclamation ;  to  wit,  the  benefits  of  hold- 
ing men  in  bondage.  I  beg  leave  to  call  the  attention 
of  gentlemen  to  the  fact,  that  the  proclamation  of  Sept. 
22  nowhere  holds  out  the  hope  of  exemption  from  its 
operation  to  any  district  because  it  should  have  a  member 
of  Congress ;  that,  on  the  other  hand,  the  proclamation  of 
Sept.  22  is  put  upon  the  distinct  ground,  that  it  is  not 
a  district,  but  the  State,  which  is  to  be  represented,  and 
by  an  election  at  which  a  majority  of  the  voters  of  a 
State  voted.  The  suggestion  in  the  proclamation  of  the 
governor  was,  therefore,  without  authority,  unless  derived 
from  other  source  than  the  proclamation  of  Sept.  22. 

But,  if  that  proclamation  had  contained  this  promise  in 
exact  terms,  I  do  not  see  why  loyal  and  faithful  people 
might  not  desire  to  avoid  the  practical  effects  upon  them, 
whether  legal  or  illegal,  constitutional  or  in  conflict  with 
the  Constitution,  wise  or  unwise.  That  argument  proves 
too  much.  It  goes  to  this  extent,  that  elections  are  not 
to  be  influenced  by  the  consideration,  that  those  engaged 
in  them  may  thus  secure  more  effectually  the  protection 
of  the  Government.  One  very  excellent  reason  why  they 
should  exercise  the  elective  franchise,  and  send  members 
to  this  House,  is  to  effect  that  object. 

I  put  this  case,  then,  upon  two  or  three  plain  grounds. 
I  put  it  upon  the  ground,  that  these  men,  who  are  asking 
seats  in  this  House,  are  loyal  citizens  of  the  United  States  ; 
that  they  have  been  elected  by  loyal  citizens  of  the  United 
States ;  that  they  have  been  elected  at  an  election  which 
was  free ;  that  they  were  elected  by  numbers,  which, 
compared  with  other  elections,  indicate  that  the  people  in 


182  THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES. 

the  districts  were  in  the  movement,  and  that  it  was  had 
in  entire  good  faith.  I  put  it  upon  the  plain  ground, 
that  while  you  demand  of  the  loyal  people  of  Louisiana 
faithful  allegiance  and  obedience  to  your  laws,  and  to 
bear  the  burdens  of  your  Government,  you  should  give 
to  them  the  inestimable  rights  which  that  Government 
was  formed  to  secure  to  them ;  without  which  they  would 
be  subjects,  and  not  citizens ;  slaves,  and  not  freemen. 
I  put  it  upon  the  still  higher  ground,  that  the  loyal  men 
in  the  State  of  Louisiana,  who  have  not  engaged  in  this 
rebellion,  or  have  returned  at  the  earliest  moment  to 
their  allegiance,  have  a  right  to  come  before  you,  and  ask 
that  you  shall  not  permit  the  mere  letter  of  the  law, 
which  to-day  throws  upon  them  all  the  weight  and  bur- 
dens of  the  Government,  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the 
exercise  of  their  dearest  and  most  sacred  rights,  the 
rights  which  bind  them  to  you,  and  make  them  of  you. 

Mr.  Speaker,  permit  me  to  make  one  other  practical 
suggestion  to  the  House  ;  and  that  is,  that  the  only  way 
in  which  you  can  reconstruct  this  Government  is  by  the 
co-operation  of  the  loyal  men  in  the  seceded  States.  If 
you  mean  to  go  a  step  further,  and  try  to  bring  these 
States  under  absolute  subjection,  wipe  them  out  of  exist- 
ence, and  reconstruct  them  according  to  your  will  and 
pleasure  and  not  their  rights,  you  have  taken  upon  your- 
self a  task  which  you  have  not  the  power  to  execute, 
and  which,  if  you  had,  would  result  in  the  overthrow  of 
your  liberties  as  well  as  theirs.  No  government  would 
be  a  fit  instrument  for  such  a  work  but  a  military  despot- 
ism. History  gives  us  no  hope  in  such  a  war.  But  if, 
on  the  other  hand,  you  expect,  as  it  seems  to  me  every 


THE   LOUISIANA    ELECTION    CASES.  183 

rational  man  must  expect,  to  reconstruct  the  Govern- 
ment with  the  sympathy,  co-operation,  and  aid  of  the 
loyal  men  of  these  States,  then  I  ask  you,  in  the  name  of 
prudence  and  of  justice,  not  to  shut  the  doors  of  this 
House  against  them.  Do  not,  I  beseech  you,  teach  them 
the  terrible  lesson,  that  your  powers  are  effective  to 
destroy,  but  not  to  redeem ;  to  crush,  but  not  to  save. 
Meet  them  at  the  threshold ;  welcome  and  bless  them  as 
they  seek  once  more  the  shelter  of  the  old  homestead. 


184 


CONSCRIPTION    BILL. 


HOUSE   OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  FEB.  25,  1863. 

The  House  resumed,  as  the  regular  order  of  business,  the  conside- 
ration of  the  bill  of  the  Senate  (No.  511)  for  enrolling  and  calling  out 
the  national  forces,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Mr.  THOMAS  obtained  the  floor. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman  from  New  York  hav- 
ing already  spoken,  and  not  being  the  mover  or  intro- 
ducer of  the  proposition,  cannot  speak  again  without  the 
leave  of  the  House.  The  gentleman  from  Massachu- 
setts [Mr.  Thomas]  is  entitled  to  the  floor. 

Mr.  BAKER.  Will  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts 
yield  to  me  for  a  moment  1 

Mr.  THOMAS,  No,  sir :  I  cannot  yield  for  any  pur- 
pose. I  have  but  twenty  minutes. 

Mr.  HOLMAN.  I  rise  to  a  point  of  order.  I  sought 
the  floor  at  the  time  the  gentleman  from  New  York 
[Mr.  Olin]  did,  and  raised  upon  him  the  point  of  order 
which  has  been  disposed  of  by  the  Chair ;  and  I  think, 
therefore,  I  am  entitled  to  the  floor. 

The  SPEAKER.  The  Chair  did  not  understand  the 
gentleman  from  Indiana  as  claiming  the  floor,  but  only 
as  raising  the  question  of  order.  If  the  gentleman 
raised  it  desiring  to  speak  himself,  he  is  entitled  to  the 
floor. 


CONSCRIPTION    BILL.  185 

Mr.  HOLMAN.  I  understand  that  the  gentleman  from 
Kentucky  [Mr.  Crittenden]  and  the  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts  [Mr.  Thomas]  desire  to  be  heard  on  this 
bill,  and  I  am  unwilling  to  occupy  the  time  of  the  House 
while  those  gentlemen  desire  to  speak.  I  will,  there- 
fore, yield  to  those  gentlemen ;  and  I  now  resign  the 
floor  to  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts. 

Mr.  THOMAS.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  thank  my  friend  from 
Indiana  [Mr.  Holman]  for  his  great  courtesy  in  yield- 
ing to  me  the  floor.  I  rejoice,  with  exceeding  joy,  that 
I  have  no  party  interests  to  represent,  no  party  topics 
to  discuss.  I  have  heard  with  sorrow,  not  to  say  dis- 
gust, the  voices  of  discord  and  bitter  strife  from  both 
sides  of  the  House.  If  the  spirit  of  party  cannot  be 
subdued  or  chastened  in  the  presence  of  our  imminent 
peril,  God  save  the  country  ;  for  he  only  can.  .  *•.. 

In  the  few  remarks  I  shall  have  time  to  submit  to  the 
House,  I  would  look  directly  to  the  merits  of  the  mea- 
sure before  us.  Mr.  Speaker,  this  is  a  terrible  bill; 
terrible  in  the  powers  it  confers  upon  the  Executive, 
terrible  in  the  duty  and  burden  it  imposes  upon  the  citi- 
zen. I  meet  the  suggestion  by  one  as  obvious  and  as 
cogent ;  and  that  is,  that  the  exigency  is  a  terrible  one, 
and  calls  for  the  use  of  all  the  powers  with  which  the 
Government  is  invested. 

Some  of  the  features  of  the  bill  my  judgment  con- 
demns, unhesitatingly  condemns. 

The  period  for  which  the  service  is  required  is  unrea- 
sonably long.  I  think  the  enrolment  should  not  include 
judges  of  the  State  courts,  or  ministers  of  the  gospel, 
or  members  of  Congress  of  either  branch ;  though  the 

24 


186  CONSCRIPTION    BILL. 

inclusion  of  members  of  Congress  would  be,  I  thin] 
simply  void.  I  earnestly  object  also  to  the  provision  ( 
the  bill  for  the  arrest  of  civilians  by  the  military  power 
but  I  understand  that  gentlemen  upon  my  right  wi 
consent  to  an  amendment  which  shall  strike  out  the 
feature.  But,  saving  these  objections,  I  think  th 
bill  is  within  the  scope  of  the  Constitution,  and  nece§ 
sary  and  just. 

First,  the  question  of  power.     Congress  has  power  t 
"declare  war."     A  necessary  incident  to   this   powe 
would  be  that  of  raising  and  supporting  armies.     Bu 
the  power  to  "  raise  and  support  armies "  is  given  ii 
terms.     No  limitation  is  imposed  as  to  the  numbers  t( 
be  raised,  or  the  mode  of  raising.     In  the  nature  oi 
things,   such   limitation   could   not   be  imposed.     The 
power  must  be  broad  enough  to  meet  all  possible  exi- 
gencies ;  and  the  possible  exigencies  of  the  country  no 
man  or  prophet  could  foresee.     The  powers  of  Con- 
gress within  their  scope  are  supreme,  and  strike  directly 
to  the  subject,  and  hold  him  in  their  firm  and  iron 
grasp.     I  stand  by  the  opinion,  early  expressed  upon 
this  floor,  that  there  is  not  a  human  being,  domiciled 
within  the  territory  of  the  United  States,  black  or  white, 
bond  or  free,  whom  the  Government  may  not  use  for  its 
military  service,  whenever  the  defence  of  the  country 
requires  ;    and  of  this  exigency  Congress  alone  must 
judge. 

Is  the  exercise  of  the  power  to  raise  armies  made 
dependent  upon  the  consent  of  the  individual  citizen  ? 
I  say,  clearly  not.  "  Government  is  not  influence"  said 
Washington  ;  it  is  not  moral  suasion.  That  only  is  gov- 


CONSCRIPTION    BILL.  187 

cnment  which  can  command  obedience  and  enforce  it. 
'he  duty  of  the  citizen  to  defend  the  State  is  admitted. 
Joes  the  discharge  of  that  duty  depend  upon  his  will 
nd  discretion,  or  the  will  and  discretion  of  the  Gov- 
rnment?  If  upon  the  former,  the  objection  is  fatal 
ven  to  any  militia  law :  if  upon  the  latter,  the  extent, 
nd  mode  of  use,  are  questions  for  Congress  only. 

The  question  was  asked  half  a  century  ago,  whether, 
mder  the  power  to  support  armies,  Government  could 
ake  property  without  consent ;  and,  if  not,  how  it  was, 
hat,  under  the  power  to  raise  armies,  you  can  take 
men  without  consent.     I  answer,  that  very  clearly,  for 
the  support  of  the  war,  you  may  take  the  property  of 
the  subject  without  his  consent,  but  not  without  com- 
pensation ;  for  the  fifth  article  of  the  Amendments  has 
put  this  limitation  upon  your  power. 

Under  the  "  Articles  of  Confederation,"  Congress  had 
not  power  to  raise  armies,  though  it  had  to  build  and 
equip  a  navy.  Its  duty  was  to  agree  upon  the  number 
of  land  forces,  and  to  make  requisitions  upon  each  State 
for  its  quota  (Art.  9).  But  the  men  who  framed  the 
Constitution,  knew,  by  the  experience  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, how  defective  and  inadequate  was  such  power,  and 
that,  whatever  possible  danger  there  might  be  in  the 
grant  of  the  power  without  limitation,  any  limitation 
might  prove  fatal  to  the  national  defence.  The  power 
was  therefore  given  to  raise  armies  without  qualification  ; 
and,  though  the  subject  of  much  bitter  complaint  and 
criticism  in  the  State  Conventions,  to-day  at  least  its 
necessity  is  plain  to  all  men. 

Having  the  power  to  raise  and  support  armies,  and 


188  CONSCRIPTION    BILL. 

the  exigency  existing  in  which  the  use  of  that  power  is 
necessary,  the  question  arises,  whether  the  powers  given 
to  Congress  and  the  States,  with  respect  to  the  militia, 
qualify  and  restrain  the  power  to  raise  and  support 
armies.  Very  clearly  not,  Mr.  Speaker.  They  are  dis- 
tinct, independent  powers.  The  militia  is  a  branch  of 
service  well  understood  in  the  mother- country  and  our 
own,  to  be  called  forth  "  to  execute  the  laws,  suppress 
insurrections,  and  repel  invasions."  It  was  not  designed 
for  permanent  service,  but  to  meet  special  exigencies, 
and  for  brief  periods  of  time. 

Much  has  been  said,  though  without  much  reflection, 
about  the  very  "  unpatriotic  "  course  of  the  Government 
of  Massachusetts  with  respect  to  the  use  of  the  militia 
in  the  war  of  1812.  The  opinion  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Massachusetts  of  that  day  proceeded,  as  I  recol- 
lect it,  upon  the  ground,  that,  the  purposes  of  the  militia 
being  to  suppress  insurrection  and  repel  invasion,  the 
militia  of  the  State  could  not  be  required  by  the  Federal 
Executive  to  go  beyond  the  limits  of  the  State.  To  that 
view  I  do  not  assent ;  but  it  is,  I  think,  quite  plain,  they 
are  not,  in  the  light  of  the  Constitution,  a  part  of  the 
army  of  the  United  States :  they  are  to  be  enrolled  and 
organized  for  the  purposes  stated  in  the  Constitution, 
and  for  no  other. 

This  unqualified  power  to  raise  and  support  armies  is 
given  us  to  meet  an  hour  and  an  exigency  like  this. 

The  gentleman  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Wickliffe]  says 
that  the  army  is  made  up,  and  has  been  made  up,  by 
volunteer  enlistments,  and  that  you  never  have  "  con- 
scripted" men  into  the  army.  Doubtless,  such  has 


CONSCRIPTION    BILL.  189 

heretofore  been  the  practice ;  but  the  exigency  never 
before  arose  when  it  was  necessary  to  conscript  men 
into  an  army.  The  exigency  does  not  confer  new 
powers,  but  evokes  them  into  service.  At  this  moment, 
the  question,  whether  we  shall  use  this  power,  is  not  one 
of  expediency  merely ;  not  what  is  best.  It  is,  in  effect, 
a  question,  to  this  nation,  of  life  or  death.  We  literally 
have  no  choice. 

Gentlemen  upon  my  right  (the  Republican  side  of 
the  House)  know  that  it  is  my  conviction,  that  all  the 
vaunted  panaceas  for  our  troubles  have  failed,  utterly 
failed.  I  expected  them  to  fail.  I  attempted  in  vain 
to  satisfy  the  House,  that  it  was  leaning  upon  reeds 
shaken  by  the  wind.  My  earnest,  repeated  suggestions 
were,  of  course,  unheeded ;  but  the  results  are  too 
palpable  to  be  overlooked  or  mistaken,  and  reason  is 
slowly  re-ascending  the  steps  of  its  throne.  Pray  God 
it  may  not  be  too  late. 

The  policy  inaugurated  on  the  1st  of  December,  1861, 
has  been  fruitless  of  good :  it  has  changed  the  ostensi- 
ble, if  not  real,  issue  of  the  war.  That  policy,  and  the 
want  of  persistent  vigor  in  our  military  counsels,  render 
any  further  reliance  upon  voluntary  enlistments  futile. 
The  nostrums  have  all  failed.  Confiscation,  emancipa- 
tion by  Congress,  emancipation  by  the  proclamation  of 
the  President,  compensated  emancipation,  arbitrary  ar- 
rests, paper  made  legal  tender,  negro  armies,  will  not 
do  the  mighty  work.  Nothing  will  save  us  now  but  vic- 
rories  in  the  field  and  on  the  sea ;  and  then  the  proffer 
of  the  olive  branch,  with  the  most  liberal  terms  of 
reconciliation  and  re-union.  We  can  get  armies  in  no 


190  CONSCRIPTION    BILL. 

other  way  but  by  measures  substantially  those  in  the  bill 
before  us,  unless  the  Administration  will  retrace  its 
steps,  and  return  to  the  way  of  the  Constitution,  for  us 
the  strait  and  narrow  way  which  leads  unto  life.  The 
war  on  paper  is  at  an  end.  The  people  have,  for  a 
time,  been  deluded  by  it.  That  delusion  exists  no 
longer.  If  you  are  to  suppress  this  Rebellion,  all  instru- 
mentalities will  fail  you  but  the  power  of  your  own 
right  arm. 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  measures  and  policy  heretofore  pur- 
sued have  not  been  merely  fruitless  of  good ;  they  have 
been  fruitful  of  evil :  they  have  made,  or  largely  contri- 
buted to  make,  a  united  South;  they  have  made  a 
divided  North ;  they  have  alienated  from  the  Adminis- 
tration the  confidence  and  affection  of  large  portions  of 
the  people ;  they  have  paralyzed  your  arm,  and  divided 
your  counsels.  Gentlemen  natter  themselves  this  alien- 
ation and  disaffection  are  the  work  of  the  Democrats ; 
that  the  people  have  been  misled  and  deceived  by  their 
wiles.  Sir,  the  people  of  this  country  read,  and  keep 
their  eyes  open,  and  comprehend ;  and  the  plain  fact  is, 
you  cannot  unite  them  upon  the  policy  you  now  pursue. 
They  do  not  believe  in  destroying  the  Union  and  Con- 
stitution in  the  hope  of  building  up  better  by  force  of 
arms.  You  may  unite  them  on  the  issue  of  maintaining 
the  Union  and  the  Government  at  every  price  and  cost, 
but  upon  no  other. 

Having  distracted  the  public  mind,  having  alienated  to 
a  great  degree  the  affection  and  confidence  of  the  coun- 
try, what  is  left  to  you  ?  To  resort  to  those  constitutional 
powers  vested  in  you  for  the  preservation  of  the  Gov- 


CONSCRIPTION    BILL.  191 

ernment  which  you  have  in  trust,  and  which  you  must 
use,  or  be  false  to  that  trust.  Gentlemen  say  the  peo- 
ple will  not  bear  this  measure.  I  will  not  believe  it.  I 
believe  the  people  of  this  country  are  ready  to  do  and 
to  endure  every  thing  for  the  preservation  of  their  unity, 
their  national  life,  and,  through  that  unity  and  that 
national  life,  all  that  makes  life  precious  to  men :  they 
will  submit  to  it.  In  view  of  the  infinite  interests  at 
stake  in  this  great  controversy ;  in  the  solemn  conviction 
that  there  is  to-day  no  hope  of  peace  except  in  disinte- 
gration ;  that,  as  a  nation,  we  must  conquer  in  arms,  or 
perish ;  they  will  meet  and  respond  to  this  imperative 
call  of  duty.  Such  is  my  hope  and  trust. 

But,  Mr.  Speaker,  suppose  they  hesitate ;  suppose 
they  do  not  submit:  you  can  but  try;  you  have  no 
other  hope.  The  negro  will  not  save  you ;  paper 
money  will  not  save  you ;  your  infractions  of  personal 
liberty  will  not  save  you.  If  the  illegal  and  unnecessary 
arrests  are  persisted  in,  in  the  peaceful  and  loyal  States, 
they  will  ruin  you.  Go  firmly  to  the  people,  and  pre- 
sent to  them  the  real  issue :  they  will  understand  the 
terrible  exigency  in  which  the  country  is  placed ;  and 
they  will  be  true  to  that  country,  if  you  show  clearly  to 
their  comprehension  the  length  and  breadth  and  height 
and  depth  of  that  exigency.  Mr.  Speaker,  the  issue 
must  be  met  at  all  hazards.  If  the  people  will  not 
support  you,  if  they  will  not  do  this  highest  act  of  duty, 
the  days  of  this  Republic  are  numbered,  the  end  is 
nigh.  Satisfy  them  that  you  mean  to  be  true  to  the 
Constitution  and  the  Union,  and  they  will  be  true  to 
you,  and  will  uphold  and  save  you. 


192  CONSCRIPTION    BILL. 

The  issue,  I  repeat,  must  be  met.  You  die  without 
this  measure :  you  can  no  more  with  it,  except  you  die, 
as  cowards  die,  many  times.  I  go,  therefore,  for  appeal- 
ing from  panaceas  and  make-shifts  to  this  highest,  most 
solemn,  and  imperative  duty  of  the  citizen  to  protect 
the  life  of  the  State. 


193 


NEW  ENGLAND   AND  THE   UNION. 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  FEB.  28,  1863. 

Mr.  SPEAKER,  —  The  most  careless  observer  of  the 
signs  of  the  times  will  not  have  failed  to  notice 
the  attacks,  frequent,  persistent,  ubiquitous,  upon  the 
history,  character,  and  policy  of  New  England.  The 
evidence  of  union  and  concert  in  these  attacks  is  plain ; 
and,  what  is  very  significant,  the  concert  includes  the 
politicians  and  presses  of  the  States  in  arms  against  us. 
The  aim  and  purpose  of  these  attacks  are  palpable. 
They  are  not  for  counsel,  rebuke,  chastening :  to  these 
we  might  give  heed  for  possible  good.  The  obvious  pur- 
pose of  this  war  of  words  is  to  create  a  feeling  of  bitter 
hostility  to  New  England  in  the  Western  and  Middle 
States  (the  traitors  in  arms  against  the  Union  hate  her 
now  with  sufficient  intensity) ;  to  force  the  conviction 
upon  those  States,  that  the  character  and  policy  of  New 
England  are  such,  that  the  good-will  and  harmony  of 
the  country  cannot  be  maintained  while  she  forms  part 
of  the  Union ;  and  to  bring  about  a  reconstruction  on 
the  basis  of  the  Confederate  Government,  slavery  for 
its  corner-stone,  and  "  New  England  left  out  in  the 
cold." 

The    element    of  the    New-England    character   and 
policy,  which,  it  is  averred,  makes  union  with  her  intole- 

25 


194  NEW    ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION. 

rable  and  impracticable,  is  her  Puritanism.  In  an  age 
of  discoveries,  that  discovery  is  the  most  remarkable. 
After  Puritanism  has  been  upon  the  continent  two  cen- 
turies and  a  half,  building  up  free  institutions ;  after 
union  with  it  for  three  generations,  its  light  following 
the  light  of  the  sun,  and  kindling  the  western  horizon 
with  new  glory ;  after  having  suffered  and  toiled  with  it, 
and  been  inspired  by  it  through  the  Revolution ;  after 
having  enjoyed  with  it,  or  in  spite  of  it,  for  seventy-four 
years,  the  freest  and  most  beneficent  Government  the 
Divine  Ruler  ever  permitted  to  man  ;  the  country  learns, 
with  surprise,  it  has  all  the  while  been  under  the  sad- 
dest of  delusions ;  that  what  it  had  fondly  believed  a 
"  spirit  of  health,"  is,  in  truth,  a  "  goblin  damned  ;  "  that 
New  England  is  a  diseased  limb  of  our  body  politic, 
that  must  be  severed,  or  the  whole  body  perish. 

With  scarcely  less  surprise,  if  at  a  time  like  this  we 
have  a  right  to  be  surprised  at  any  thing,  do  we  observe 
by  whom  these  assaults  upon  New  England  are  made. 
By  those  who  claim  to  be  the  especial  friends  of  the 
democratic  institutions  which  Puritan  hands  planted  and 
Puritan  tears  watered  in  the  wilderness  of  the  New 
World.  By  the  especial  friends  of  personal  liberty,  of 
which,  under  the  Tudors  and  Stuarts,  the  Puritans  were 
the  depositaries ;  and  of  which,  from  that  day  to  this, 
they  have  been  the  vigilant  and  zealous  defenders.  By 
the  especial  friends  of  the  Union,  which  germinated 
on  the  New-England  soil,  and  of  which  the  humble  con- 
federation of  the  New-England  Colonies  was  the  fore- 
runner and  the  prophecy.  By  the  especial  friends  of 
the  Constitution,  which,  in  the  hour  of  its  past  perils, 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION.  195 

has  found  in  New-England  statesmen  some  of  its  firmest 
bulwarks,  and,  in  the  greatest  of  them  all,  its  great  de- 
fender. With  Virginia,  who,  by  her  resolutions  of  1798, 
inserted  the  wedge,  which,  from  that  day,  she  has  driven 
deeper  and  nearer  to  the  heart  of  the  Union ;  with 
South  Carolina,  which,  more  than  thirty  years  ago,  set 
up  the  standard  of  revolt,  and  has  been  laboring  for  a 
generation,  with  persistent  malignity  and  folly,  to  destroy 
the  Government  she  had  felt  only  in  its  blessings  ;  with 
the  Gulf  States,  who  are  seeking,  by  a  rebellion  re- 
morseless and  bloody,  to  plunge  themselves  and  the 
country  into  the  gulf  of  woe  and  perdition ;  with  these, 
Union  is  possible  and  desirable,  but  not  with  the  Puri- 
tans of  New  England ! 

Leave  them  to  perish  on  their  granite,  ice-bound 
peaks !  Theirs  is  a  restless  spirit,  the  very  genius  of 
discontent.  They  disturbed  the  repose  of  the  Tudors ; 
they  reformed  the  Reformation ;  they  took  from  one 
Stuart  his  head,  and  from  another  his  throne ;  they 
secured  Magna  Carta ;  they  gave  to  civil  liberty  the 
Petition  of  Right ;  they  left  merry  England  in  the  hey- 
day of  its  material  prosperity,  where,  could  they  have 
appreciated  the  tranquillity  of  despotism,  they  might 
have  laughed  and  grown  fat;  they  left  the  homes  of 
childhood,  the  graves  of  fathers,  and  faced  ocean,  wil- 
derness, want,  the  savage  foe,  merely  to  pray  as  the 
spirit  taught  them  to  pray.  Simple  men,  they  might 
have  worshipped  God  in  solemn  temples,  in  cathedral 
aisles,  the  eye  ravished  with  beauty,  and  the  ear  with 
music.  They  sought  rather  the  rude  log-house  in  the 
forest,  or  the  temple  not  made  with  hands ;  preferring 


196  NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION. 

to  royal  favor  the  favor  of  the  King  of  kings.  They 
planted  their  humble  commonwealths  upon  a  sterile  soil 
and  in  an  inhospitable  climate.  Their  institutions  were 
laid  on  the  rough  granite  of  English  liberty.  Instead  of 
seeking  to  bask  in  royal  sunshine,  they  stood  out  in  the 
cold,  and  contrived  to  bar  their  doors,  not  only  against 
intruders,  but  against  the  king.  Loyal  to  the  crown 
when  the  crown  let  them  alone,  they  maintained,  from 
the  beginning,  a  substantial,  sturdy  independence. 
When  separation  came,  it  is  among  the  most  striking 
things  in  history  to  observe  how  slight  changes  in  the 
framework  of  government  were  necessary.  For  ninety 
years,  Mr.  Speaker,  their  destinies  have  been  blended 
with  those  of  the  other  colonies.  From  many  States 
sprung  up  one  nation.  To-day,  New  England  finds 
upon  her  soil  more  than  three  millions  of  free,  intel- 
ligent, happy  people.  A  million  of  living  men  born 
upon  that  soil  have  their  homes  in  the  other  States. 
One-third  of  the  population  of  the  United  States  is  of 
New-England  descent ;  its  ancestral  graves  and  memories 
with  us. 

The  Puritans  have  borne  with  them  toward  the  setting 
sun  the  institutions,  the  manners,  the  culture  of  New 
England ;  the  meeting-house,  the  town-house,  the  com- 
mon school,  the  college,  the  village  library.  They  were 
not  without  the  weaknesses  and  follies  of  their  time, 
and  follies  their  own  ;  but  in  spite  of  these,  and  over  and 
above  these,  they  had  the  elements  of  character  which 
fit  men  to  be  the  founders  of  empire,  —  conditores  impe- 
riorwn,  —  firmness,  courage,  prophetic  sagacity,  serene, 
unfaltering  trust  in  God.  And  they  were  the  founders 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION.  197 

of  an  empire ;  a  beneficent,  a  glorious,  let  us  pray  the 
infinite  Lawgiver,  an  enduring  empire. 

But  I  forget,  Mr.  Speaker :  wise  men  have  discovered 
not  only  that  the  sun  has  spots,  but  that  it  is  the  spots 
that  make  up  the  sun ;  and  that,  after  all,  there  is  no 
light  or  life  or  healing  in  his  beams ;  that  the  clothes 
are  more  than  the  man,  the  outward  more  than  the 
inward,  the  accidental  and  temporary  more  than  the  vital 
and  permanent.  The  history  of  three  centuries  is  to 
be  rewritten ;  the  judgment  of  the  civilized  world  to  be 
reversed ;  the  House  of  Stuart  to  be  recanonized ;  the 
locks  of  the  Cavalier  to  be  recurled,  and  the  Round- 
head again  set  upon  the  stocks  for  the  rabble  to  pelt. 
The  task  is  formidable  ;  but  as  wit  has  a  keen  edge,  and 
error  and  calumny  are  swift  of  foot,  it  may  be  well  to 
notice  briefly  some  items  of  the  great  debt  we  owe  to  the 
Puritans  and  their  descendants,  and  some  of  the  grounds 
of  attack. 

The  debt  which  personal  liberty  owes  to  the  Puritans 
can  scarcely  be  overstated.  By  liberty  I  mean  no  philo- 
sophical abstractions,  no  platitudes  of  French  philoso- 
phy, but  practical,  personal  freedom,  intrenched  in, 
and  defined  and  upheld  by,  sovereign  law ;  the  sense  and 
right  of  security  which  makes  a  man's  house  his  castle, 
and  his  person  sacred ;  a  man's  right  to  life,  property, 
the  use  of  his  brain  and  of  his  lips,  within  the  pale  of 
the  law,  and  unless  deprived  of  them  by  due  process 
of  law ;  the  right  without  which  all  the  forms  and 
machinery  of  free  government  are  mockery,  delusion, 
and  fraud.  It  is  to  the  Puritans  of  the  time  of  Charles 
I.  we  owe  the  great  Petition  of  Right,  to  whose  lofty 


198         NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION. 

yet  eminently  practical  ideas  of  liberty  our  times  have 
not  climbed. 

Let  me  ask  the  Clerk  to  read  the  passages  I  have 
marked.  Observe,  Mr.  Speaker,  how  history  repeats 
itself.  "  I  praised  the  dead  who  are  already  dead  more 
than  the  living  who  are  yet  alive." 

"  Whereas  also,  by  the  statute  called  the  Great  Charter  of  the 
liberties  of  England,  it  is  declared  and  enacted,  that  no  freeman  may 
be  taken  or  imprisoned,  or  be  disseized  of  his  freehold  or  liberties  or 
his  free  customs,  or  be  outlawed  or  exiled,  or  in  any  manner  de- 
stroyed, but  by  the  lawful  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  by  the  law  of  the 
land ; 

"And,  in  the  eight  and  twentieth  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Edward  III.,  it  was  declared  and  enacted,  by  authority  of  Parliament, 
that  no  man,  of  what  estate  or  condition  that  he  be,  should  be  put  out 
of  his  land  or  tenement,  nor  taken  nor  imprisoned  nor  disinherited, 
nor  put  to  death,  without  being  brought  to  answer  by  due  process  of 
law; 

"  Nevertheless,  against  the  tenor  of  the  said  statutes,  and  other  the 
good  laws  and  statutes  of  your  realm  to  that  end  provided,  divers  of 
your  subjects  have  of  late  been  imprisoned  without  any  cause  showed  ; 
and  when,  for  their  deliverance,  they  were  brought  before  justice  by 
your  majesty's  writs  of  habeas  corpus,  there  to  undergo  and  receive  as 
the  court  should  order,  and  their  keepers  commanded  to  certify  the 
causes  of  their  detainer,  no  cause  was  certified  but  that  they  were 
detained  by  your  majesty's  special  command,  signified  by  the  lords  of 
your  Privy  Council,  and  yet  were  returned  back  to  several  prisons, 
without  being  charged  with  any  thing  to  which  they  might  make 
answer  according  to  the  law  ; 

"  And  whereas  also,  by  the  said  Great  Charter,  and  other  of  the 
laws  and  statutes  of  this  your  realm,  no  man  ought  to  be  adjudged  to 
death  but  by  the  laws  established  in  this  your  realm,  either  by  the 
customs  of  the  same  realm  or  by  acts  of  Parliament ;  and  whereas 
no  oifender,  of  what  kind  soever,  is  exempted  from  the  proceedings  to 
be  used,  and  punishments  to  be  inflicted,  by  the  laws  and  statutes  of 
this  your  realm  ;  nevertheless,  of  late  time,  divers  commissions,  under 
your  majesty's  great  seal,  have  issued  forth,  by  which  certain  persons 
have  been  assigned  and  appointed  commissioners,  with  power  and 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION.  199 

authority  to  proceed  within  the  land,  according  to  the  justice  of  mar- 
tial law,  against  such  soldiers  or  marines,  or  other  dissolute  persons 
joining  with  them,  as  should  commit  any  murder,  robbery,  felony, 
mutiny,  or  other  outrage  or  misdemeanor  whatever,  and  by  such  sum- 
mary course  and  order  as  is  agreeable  to  martial  law,  and  as  is  used 
in  armies  in  time  of  war,  to  proceed  to  the  trial  and  condemnation  of 
such  offenders,  and  them  to  cause  to  be  executed  and  put  to  death 
according  to  the  law-martial : 

"  By  pretext  whereof,  some  of  your  majesty's  subjects  have  been, 
by  some  of  the  said  commissioners,  put  to  death,  when  and  where,  if 
by  the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  land  they  had  deserved  death,  by  the  same 
laws  and  statutes  also  they  might,  and  by  no  other  ought  to,  have  been 
judged  and  executed." 

You  will  not  fail  to  observe,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  there 
is  no  complaint  that  the  writs  of  habeas  corpus  were  not 
issued.  They  were  issued,  and  the  subjects  brought 
before  justice,  and  the  keepers  commanded  to  certify  the 
cause  of  their  detainer.  The  ground  of  complaint  is, 
that  no  cause  was  certified,  but  that  the  subjects  were 
detained  by  his  majesty's  special  command,  and  were 
returned  to  prison  without  being  charged  with  any  thing 
to  which  they  might  make  answer  according  to  the  law. 
The  "  privilege  of  the  writ "  was  suspended.  This  is  all 
that  can  be  done,  under  the  Constitution,  by  Congress 
or  the  Executive,  or  both  combined. 

Again :  observe  the  lofty  moral  ground  a  Puritan 
Parliament  assumes.  It  concedes  that  the  persons 
against  whom  the  "  justice  of  martial  law "  has  been 
used  might  be  "  dissolute,  and  such  as  should  commit 
murder,  robbery,  felony,  mutiny,  and  other  outrages  and 
misdemeanors ; "  but  it  never  occurred  to  the  great  au- 
thors of  this  Petition  that  men  charged  with  crimes  "  had 
no  rights."  They  knew,  as  we  know,  that  when  men 


200         NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION. 

were  the  objects  of  hatred  or  suspicion,  it  was  then,  and 
chiefly  then,  they  needed  the  shield  and  protection  of 
standing  laws. 

The  Puritan  Parliament  goes  on  to  pray  (demand) 
that  the  commission  for  proceeding  "  by  martial  law"  may 
be  revoked,  and  that  thereafter  no  commissions  of  a  like 
nature  may  issue.  To  which,  in  full  Parliament,  the 
king  answered,  "Soit  droit  comme  il  est  desiree." 

I  regret  my  time  will  not  permit  us  to  hear  every  word 
of  this  gospel  of  personal  liberty.  If  the  Puritans  had 
given  us  nothing  more,  our  debt  of  gratitude  could  never 
be  paid.  The  writ  of  habeas  corpus  of  Charles  II.  did 
not  enlarge  these  liberties.  It  was  remedial  only.  As 
such,  it  was  highly  beneficial ;  but  it  conferred  no  new 
right.  "  Its  office,"  says  Hallam,  "  was  to  cut  off  the 
abuses  by  which  the  Government's  lust  of  power,  and 
the  servile  subtilty  of  crown  lawyers,  had  impaired  so 
fundamental  a  privilege." 

If  we  cross  the  ocean  with  the  Pilgrims,  we  shall  find 
them  not  only  affirming,  but  strengthening,  the  muni- 
ments of  personal  liberty.  Proof  of  this  may  be  found 
in  the  "  Body  of  Liberties "  enacted  by  the  Colony  of 
Massachusetts  in  1641.  (I  hope  I  shall  be  pardoned 
for  taking  Massachusetts,  the  mother-colony,  as  an  illus- 
tration.) Let  me,  Mr.  Speaker,  have  two  or  three  of 
these  "  Liberties  "  read,  to  show  their  general  temper  and 
spirit,  and  how  grossly  the  colonists  have  been  misun- 
derstood :  — 

"  The  free  fruition  of  such  liberties,  immunities,  and  privileges  as 
humanity,  civility,  and  Christianity  call  for  as  due  to  every  man  in  his 
place  and  proportion,  without  impeachment  and  infringement,  hath 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION.  201 

ever  been,  and  ever  will  be,  the  tranquillity  and  stability  of  churches 
and  commonwealths ;  and  the  denial  or  deprival  thereof,  the  disturb- 
ance, if  not  the  ruin,  of  both." 

In  God's  name,  amen !    Heart  and  head  say,  amen ! 

"No  man's  life  shall  be  taken  away;  no  man's  honor  or  good 
name  shall  be  stained ;  no  man's  person  shall  be  arrested,  restrained, 
banished,  dismembered,  nor  any  ivays  punished ;  no  man  shall  be 
deprived  of  his  wife  or  children ;  no  man's  goods  or  estate  shall 
be  taken  away  from  him,  nor  any  way  endangered,  under  color  of  law, 
or  countenance  of  authority,  unless  it  be  by  virtue  or  equity  of  some 
express  law  of  the  country  warranting  the  same,  established  by  a 
General  Court,  and  sufficiently  published ;  or,  in  case  of  the  defect  of 
a  law  in  any  particular  case,  by  the  word  of  God ;  and  in  capital 
cases,  or  in  cases  concerning  dismembering  or  banishment,  according 
to  that  word  to  be  judged  by  the  General  Court." 

Magna  Carta  planted  on  the  soil  of  the  New  World. 

"  Every  man,  whether  inhabitant  or  foreigner,  free  or  not  free, 
shall  have  liberty  to  come  to  any  public  court,  council,  or  town-meet- 
ing ;  and,  either  by  speech  or  writing,  to  move  any  lawful,  season- 
able, and  material  question,  or  to  present  any  necessary  motion, 
complaint,  petition,  bill,  or  information,  whereof  that  meeting  hath 
proper  cognizance,  so  it  be  done  in  convenient  time,  due  order,  and 
respective  [respectful]  manner." 

Was  ever  the  sacred  right  of  petition  made  so  prac- 
tical and  effective? 

"  No  man's  person  shall  be  restrained  or  imprisoned  by  any  authori- 
ty whatsoever  before  the  law  hath  sentenced  him  thereto,  if  he  can 
put  in  sufficient  security,  bail,  or  mainprise  for  his  appearance,  and 
good  behavior  in  the  mean  time,  unless  it  be  in  crimes  capital,  and  con- 
tempts in  open  court,  and  in  such  cases  where  some  express  act  of 
court  doth  allow  it. 

"  Every  man  that  is  to  answer  for  any  criminal  cause,  whether  he 
be  in  prison  or  under  bail,  his  cause  shall  be  heard  and  determined  at 
the  next  court  that  hath  proper  cognizance  thereof,  and  may  be  done 
without  prejudice  of  justice. 

"  No  church  censure  shall  degrade  or  depose  any  man  from  any 
civil  dignity,  office,  or  authority  he  shall  have  in  the  Commonwealth. 

26 


202         NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION. 

"  We  likewise  give  full  power  and  liberty,  to  any  person  that  shall 
at  any  time  be  denied  or  deprived  of  any  of  these  liberties,  to  com- 
mence and  prosecute  their  suit,  complaint,  or  action,  against  every 
man  that  shall  so  do,  in  any  court  that  hath  proper  cognizance  or 
judicature  thereof." 

These  humble  colonists  comprehended  that  there 
could  be  no  justice  which  was  not  remedial ;  or  where 
the  way  to  redress  was  blocked  at  every  step. 

Now,  I  do  not  contend,  Mr.  Speaker,  that  the  found- 
ers of  New  England  were  always  true  to  their  own  pro- 
fessions, always  realized  their  own  ideal.  Far  from  it : 
they  had  not  only  the  infirmities  of  the  race,  but  the 
superstitions  and  weaknesses  of  their  time ;  when  the 
powers  of  light  were  in  struggle  with  those  of  dark- 
ness, and  held  divided  empire.  This  I  claim  for  them, 
that  they  apprehended  the  dawning  light,  and  wove  its 
golden  threads  into  the  texture  of  their  political  fabric. 
Theirs  was  the  toil  of  the  distaff:  ours,  the  robe  of 
light. 

"Be  to  their  faults  a  little  blind; 
Be  to  their  virtues  very  kind." 

The  founders,  and  four  generations  of  their  descend- 
ants, have  passed  away.  Massachusetts,  having  re- 
nounced her  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and  in  the 
midst  of  a  terrible  struggle  to  make  good  the  declara- 
tion, repairs  the  framework  of  her  government.  The 
people  will  have  a  broad,  comprehensive  declaration  of 
rights  precede  the  first  grant  of  power.  Opening  with 
the  averment,  that  all  men  are  born  free  and  equal  ; 
with  the  recognition  of  their  duty  to  worship  God,  and 
of  the  right  to  worship  him  according  to  the  dictates  of 
conscience  ;  that  government  is  instituted  for  the  people, 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION.  203 

and  all  its  just  powers  derived  from  them ;  this  declara- 
tion proceeds  to  define  and  secure  the  rights  of  personal 
liberty.  The  Constitution  of  Massachusetts  makes  it 
the  duty  of  her  public  servants  frequently  to  recur  to 
and  faithfully  to  observe  these  principles.  At  the  risk 
of  tasking  your  patience,  I  will  recur  to  and  read  a 
few  of  the  more  vital.  They  are  the  beacon-lights  of 
our  history.  Let  us  pray  the  time  may  not  come  when 
they  shall  serve  only  as  monuments  and  memorials  of  a 
better  age. 


"  Every  subject  of  the  Commonwealth  ought  to  find  a  certain  reme- 
dy, by  having  recourse  to  the  laws,  for  all  injuries  or  wrongs  which  he 
may  receive  in  his  person,  property,  or  character. 

"  No  person  shall  be  arrested,  imprisoned,  or  despoiled,  or  deprived 
of  his  property,  immunities,  or  privileges,  put  out  of  the  protection  of 
the  law,  exiled,  or  deprived  of  his  life,  liberty,  or  estate,  but  by  the 
judgment  of  his  peers  or  the  law  of  the  land. 

"  Every  person  has  a  right  to  be  secure  from  all  unreasonable 
searches  and  seizures  of  his  person,  his  houses,  his  papers,  and  all  his 
possessions.  All  warrants,  therefore,  are  contrary  to  this  right,  if  the 
cause  or  foundation  of  them  be  not  previously  supported  by  oath  or 
affirmation. 

"  The  liberty  of  the  press  is  essential  to  security  of  freedom  in  a 
State :  it  ought  not,  therefore,  to  be  restrained  in  this  Common- 
wealth. 

"  The  military  power  shall  always  be  held  in  exact  subordination  to 
the  civil  authority,  and  be  governed  by  it. 

"  The  power  of  suspending  the  laws,  or  the  execution  of  the  laws, 
ought  not  to  be  exercised  but  by  the  Legislature,  or  by  authority  derived 
from  it ;  to  be  exercised  in  such  particular  cases  only  as  the  Legisla- 
ture shall  expressly  provide  for. 

"  No  person  can,  in  any  case,  be  subject  to  law-martial,  or  to  any 
penalties  or  pains  by  virtue  of  that  law,  except  those  engaged  in  the 
army  or  navy,  and  except  the  militia  in  actual  service,  but  by  autho- 
rity of  the  Legislature." 


204  NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION. 

Mr.  Speaker,  these  principles  have  been  instilled  into 
me  from  childhood.  I  drank  them  in  with  my  mother's 
milk.  They  come  to  me  crowned  with  precious  ances- 
tral memories.  They  are  bone  of  my  bone,  flesh  of  my 
flesh,  of  the  very  warp  and  woof  of  my  being.  They 
define  for  me  the  word  "  liberty,"  the  bright  particular 
jewel  of  which  the  forms  of  free  government  are  but  the 
setting.  I  can  understand  the  change  in  the  setting :  I 
cannot  understand  the  crushing  of  the  jewel.  These 
principles  have  been  my  counsellors  here  :  I  have  walked 
in  their  path ;  I  have  been  guided  by  their  light.  My 
sense  of  what  fidelity  to  them  required  has  compelled 
me  to  dissent  from  some  of  the  measures  of  the  Admin- 
istration ;  nay,  more,  earnestly  to  oppose  them.  I  have 
regretted  the  occasion,  but  have  had  no  question  as  to 
my  duty ;  and,  without  a  shadow  of  fear  or  distrust,  I 
abide,  the  hour  of  excitement  and  passion  past,  the  sober 
judgment  of  the  Commonwealth  of  my  love  and  pride. 
God  bless  her,  whether  she  condemn  or  uphold ! 

To  return.  When,  eight  years  later,  the  question  as 
to  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
was  presented  to  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  they 
objected  that  no  Bill  of  Rights  was  made  part  of  the 
nation's  supreme  law.  They  led  the  way  in  the  adop- 
tion of  the  amendments  which  make  up  our  national 
Magna  Carta.  Articles  two,  three,  six,  seven,  and  ten, 
are  from  the  Massachusetts  Bill  of  Rights.  Articles 
one,  four,  five,  and  eight,  are  found  in  our  Bill  of 
Rights,  but  were  substantially  taken  from  the  Declara- 
tion of  Rights  of  Virginia  in  1776. 

These  facts  show  the   traditional,   settled   policy  of 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UXIOS.  205 

Massachusetts.  Her  personal-liberty  bills  had  their 
origin  in  this  her  lifelong  devotion  to  this  policy ;  in  the 
desire  of  her  people  to  give  to  the  humblest  man  on  her 
soil,  to  the  fugitive  from  bondage,  the  presumptions  of 
the  common  law.  and  habeas  corpus,  and  trial  by  jury. 
I  do  not  say,  her  legislation  did  not  overstep  the  just 
boundary  between  the  powers  of  the  State  and  National 
Governments :  I  think  it  did.  But,  having  had  occasion 
to  examine  carefully  that  legislation,  I  do  say.  that  its 
character  has  been  grossly  misrepresented.  I  do  aver, 
that  in  no  respect  in  which  that  legislation  passed  a 
hairVbreadth  the  line  of  State  powers  has  it  been  sus- 
tained by  the  judiciary  of  the  State.  I  do  say,  that  there 
never  has  been  a  day  or  hour,  when  the  arrest  of  any 
fugitive  from  service  has  been  defeated  by  any  statute 
of  Massachusetts  recognized  and  enforced  by  its  judi- 
cial tribunals.  I  do  aver,  that  by  no  law  or  judicial 
decree  in  that  Commonwealth  have  the  rights  of  any 
one  master,  in  any  one  case,  been  destroyed  or  impaired. 
I  always  opposed  that  legislation,  because  I  felt  it  was 
incapable  of  doing  any  legal,  substantial  good,  and  was 
not,  in  spirit,  loyal  to  the  Union  ;  because  it  wounded 
and  grieved  the  friends  of  the  Union.  The  traitors  who 
brooded  over  and  gave  life  and  form  to  this  Rebellion 
knew  full  well  that  their  rights  had  never  been  impaired 
by  these  laws ;  and  were  driven  to  the  shallow  pretence, 
that  the  void  act  of  a  State  Legislature,  not  upheld  by 
its  courts  or  executive,  had  the  effect  to  nullify  acts  of 
Congress,  and  prevent  their  execution.  See  the  ordi- 
nance of  secession  of  South  Carolina;  false  premises 
leading  to  false  conclusions. 


206  NEW    ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION. 

A  people  willing  to  risk  so  much  to  guard  the  rights 
of  the  fugitive  from  service  cannot  fail  to  view  with 
deep  sensibility  the  arrests  made  in  the  peaceful  and 
loyal  States,  where  no  plea  of  necessity  now  obtains, 
whose  usual  channels  of  justice  are  unobstructed,  in 
violation  of  the  muniments  of  liberty,  to  illustrate  and 
secure  which  has  been  their  glory  and  pride.  They 
cannot  but  regard  with  distrust,  if  not  with  indignation, 
the  subtile  lawyer  and  the  time-serving  politician,  who 
not  only  defend,  but  stimulate  and  encourage  them. 
They  cannot  but  deprecate  the  recurrence  of  acts  which 
serve  only  to  weaken  the  love  of  Union,  and  to  encour- 
age and  give  comfort  to  its  foes. 

Let 'us  turn  now,  for  a  moment,  to  the  debt  which  The 
Union  owes  to  New  England.  As  I  have  before  sug- 
gested, the  germ  of  the  Union  is  to  be  found  in  the  con- 
federation of  the  New-England  Colonies  in  1643,  with 
its  Union  army  of  two  hundred  and  thirty-five  men. 
In  the  articles  of  this  confederation  may  be  found  the 
great  idea  and  thought,  embodied  and  made  effective  in 
the  Constitution,  the  reconciliation  of  central  power 
with  local  independence  ;  for  security  against  dangers 
without,  and  conflicts  within,  mutual  protection  and 
reciprocal  dependence  ;  for  domestic  institutions  and  lo- 
cal interests,  independence  and  entire  self-control.  The 
distribution  of  powers  between  the  central  Government 
and  the  States,  and  the  States  and  the  municipalities,  is 
the  great  political  thought  which  we  have  organized  and 
illustrated ;  unity  without  centralization,  unity  with  di- 
versities of  policy  and  operation.  The  result  of  unity 
with  centralization  would  be  despotism,  whatever  the 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION.  207 

outward  form:  the  fruit  of  unity  with  diversity  has 
been  the  most  beautiful  illustration  the  world  has  seen 
of  the  largest  liberty  blended  with  the  firmest  order. 
This  humble  confederation  formed  the  first  American 
Union,  and  contained  the  first  fugitive-slave  law. 

If  we  come  down  to  the  Revolution,  the  labors  and 
sacrifices  of  the  New-England  Colonies  are  matters  of 
the  most  familiar  history.  Their  present  is  trembling 
in  the  balance  ;  their  future  is  with  God ;  their  past  has 
stood  before  the  judgment-seat,  and  has  put  on  the 
white  robe.  Rich  as  the  country  .may  be  with  glorious 
memories,  she  cannot  part  with  these.  The  heavens 
may  burn  with  other  celestial  lights ;  the  mariner  will 
not  spare  the  north  star.  The  New-England  Colonies 
inaugurated  the  Revolution.  The  first  blood  was  spilt 
upon  their  soil.  The  four  New-England  Colonies,  with 
a  population  not  exceeding  nine  hundred  thousand,  fur- 
nished to  the  war  (in  continental  troops  and  militia) 
over  one  hundred  and  forty-seven  thousand  men.  With 
one-third  of  the  population  of  the  United  Colonies,  they 
furnished  two-thirds  of  all  the  troops  ;  Massachusetts 
raising  some  twelve  thousand  more  than  the  six  Southern 
States.  This  is  said  in  no  spirit  of  boasting,  Mr. 
Speaker ;  but,  when  our  lot  and  right  in  the  homestead 
are  questioned,  it  is  not  ungraceful  to  allude  to  our 
labors  in  securing  it. 

To  the  administration  and  policy  of  Washington,  New 
England  was  a  firm  and  unwavering  friend.  For  sixty 
years,  her  politics,  with  slight  departures,  were  of  his 
school.  Need  I  say,  that,  if  the  policy  and  counsels  of 
the  Father  of  his  Country  had  been  followed  by  the 


208  NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION. 

whole  country,  this  terrible  civil  war  would  have  been 
averted;  that,  since  the  resolutions  of  1798,  we  have 
increased  the  centrifugal  forces  of  the  Government,  in- 
stead of  the  centripetal ;  have  thought  too  much  of  the 
States,  and  too  little  of  "  that  unity  of  government  which 
constitutes  us  one  people  "  ? 

There  was  a  brief  time,  indeed,  when  New  England, 
her  commerce  paralyzed,  her  industry  prostrated,  by  the 
policy  of  the  National  Government,  seemed  to  be  start- 
ing from  her  sphere ;  but  she  soon  easily  and  naturally 
resumed  her  wonted  orbit  of  order,  law,  and  obedience. 
From  the  peace  of  1815  to  1850,  faithful  to  the  Consti- 
tution and  the  Union,  she  advocated  broad  and  national 
views  of  the  Constitution,  and  a  liberal  use  of  the  powers 
of  the  General  Government  for  the  development  of  the 
industry  and  material  resources  of  the  country. 

New  England  is  often  reproached  on  this  floor  for 
the  Tariff  policy  of  the  Government.  She  did  not  in- 
augurate the  policy.  It  was  not  her  choice.  When  the 
country  embarked  in  it,  and  the  industry  and  capital  of 
New  England  had  been  diverted  to  manufactures,  she 
felt,  and  justly,  that  they  had  a  claim  to  the  continued 
care  and  protection  of  the  Government.  At  no  time 
since  the  inauguration  of  this  policy  has  she  controlled 
the  counsels  of  the  Administration ;  and,  for  the  greater 
part  of  the  time,  she  has  had  a  limited  influence  in  those 
counsels.  She  has,  indeed,  believed  that  such  an  ad- 
justment of  duties  on  imports  as  would  protect  our 
industry  was  just  and  wise  and  beneficent  for  all  parts 
of  the  country  ;  but,  for  the  inaugurating  and  establish- 
ing the  tariff  policy,  she  may  not  claim  the  credit,  and 
is  not  responsible. 


s 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION.  209 

The  charge  against  New  England,  of  a  narrow  and 
illiberal  policy  towards  the  West,  is  also  without  the  least 
foundation  in  fact.  In  his  great  speech  in  reply  to  Mr. 
Hayne,  in  1830,  Mr.  Webster  indignantly  repelled  the 
charge,  then  first  conjured  up,  for  narrow  party  pur- 
poses : 

"  I  deny  that  the  East  has  at  any  time  shown  an  illiberal  policy 
towards  the  West.  I  pronounce  the  whole  accusation  to  be  without 
the  least  foundation  in  any  facts  existing  either  now  or  at  any  pre- 
vious time.  I  deny  it  in  the  general,  and  I  deny  each  and  all  its 
particulars.  I  deny  the  sum  total,  and  I  deny  the  detail.  I  deny 
that  the  East  has  ever  manifested  hostility  to  the  West,  and  I  deny  that 
she  has  adopted  any  policy  that  would  naturally  have  led  her  to  such 
a  course." 

With  respect  to  the  distribution  of  the  public  lands, 
the  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  and  one  of  her  wisest 
sons  (John  Davis),  in  1841,  in  a  special  message  to  the 
Legislature,  declared  "  that  the  new  States  were  entitled 
to  a  more  liberal  share  of  the  public  lands  than  the  old 
States,  as  we  owe  to  their  enterprise  much  of  the  value 
the  property  has  acquired."  And  a  resolution  was  passed 
by  the  Legislature,  declaring, 

"  That,  in  the  disposition  of  the  public  lands,  this  Commonwealth 
approves  of  making  liberal  provisions  for  the  new  States ;  and  that 
she  ever  has  been,  and  still  is,  ready  to  co-operate  with  other  portions 
of  the  Union  in  securing  to  these  States  such  provisions." 

Equally  just  and  liberal  has  been  the  course  of  New 
England  in  relation  to  the  system  of  internal  improve- 
ments in  the  new  States.  Said  Mr.  Webster,  in  the 
speech  before  referred  to, 

"  I  assert,  boldly,  that  in  all  measures  conducive  to  the  welfare  of 
the  West,  since  my  acquaintance  here,  no  part  of  the  country  has 
manifested  a  more  liberal  policy.  I  beg  to  say,  sir,  that  I  do  not 

27 


210  NEW   ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION. 

state  this  with  a  view  of  claiming  for  her  any  special  regard  on  that 
account.  Not  at  all.  She  does  not  place  her  support  of  measures 
on  the  ground  of  favor  conferred.  Far  otherwise.  What  she  has 
done  has  been  consonant  to  her  view  of  the  general  good,  and  there- 
fore she  has  done  it.  She  has  sought  to  make  no  gain  of  it :  on  the 
contrary,  individuals  may  have  felt,  undoubtedly,  some  natural  regret 
at  finding  the  relative  importance  of  their  own  States  diminished  by 
the  growth  of  the  West.  New  England  has  regarded  that  as  the 
natural  course  of  things,  and  has  never  complained  of  it.  Let  me  see 
any  one  measure  favorable  to  the  West  which  has  been  opposed  by 
New  England,  since  the  Government  bestowed  its  attention  on  these 
western  improvements.  Select  what  you  will,  if  it  be  a  measure  of 
acknowledged  utility,  I  answer  for  it,  it  will  be  found  that  not  only 
were  New-England  votes  cast  for  it,  but  New-England  votes  secured 
its  passage." 

That  her  course  since  1830  has  been  equally  just  and 
liberal,  the  records  of  both  Houses  of  Congress  attest. 

For  the  great  system  of  internal  improvements,  the  re- 
sult of  private  enterprise,  by  which  the  Valley  of  the 
Mississippi  has  been  brought  so  near  to  us,  and  its  vast 
material  resources  so  marvellously  and  rapidly  devel- 
oped, the  West  is  to  a  very  large  extent  indebted  to  the 
capital  and  enterprise  of  New  England.  Capital  was 
doubtless  seeking  a  profitable  investment ;  but  the  in- 
vestments would  not  have  been  made  but  for  the  large 
reciprocal  trust  and  confidence  between  New  England 
and  the  West. 

Five  hundred  million  dollars,  a  liberal  share  of  the 
amount  from  New  England,  have  been  expended  in 
the  canals  and  railroads  constructed  to  give  to  the  great 
lakes  a  new  outlet  to  the  sea.  The  great  consumers  of 
the  products  of  the  free  States  in  this  valley  are  north- 
east of  it.  Forty-nine  fiftieths  of  the  cereals  of  the 
North-west,  seeking  a  foreign  market,  find  their  way,  by 


NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION.         211 

these  new  channels  of  communication,  to  the  tide-waters 
at  New  York.  The  real  mouths  of  the  Mississippi  open 
to  the  North-east.  Art,  labor,  and  the  iron  will  of  man, 
are  stronger  than  Nature,  and  mould  and  bend  her  to 
their  purposes.  Ties  of  birth,  kindred,  marriage,  early 
associations,  memories  of  fatherland,  common  institu- 
tions, common  culture,  thought,  faith,  reciprocal  and 
interdependent  interests,  bind  the  North  and  West  to- 
gether. Crafty  and  selfish  politicians  cannot  sever  them. 
They  can  sever  from  themselves  the  affection  and  con- 
fidence of  the  people  of  both  sections.  They  can  leave 
themselves  out  in  the  cold. 

Such,  Mr.  Speaker,  briefly,  hastily  stated,  were  the 
principles  and  traditional  policy  of  New  England  to 
the  close  of  the  first  half  of  the  present  century. 

I  do  not  shrink  from  the  consideration  of  her  position 
and  relations  to  the  Union  for  the  last  twelve  years,  or 
her  position  to-day.  I  must  speak  freely,  and  with  the 
love  that  casteth  out  fear.  I  am  not  insensible  of 
the  power  which  radical,  not  to  say  disorganizing,  revo- 
lutionary views  have  acquired  among  us  ;  the  setting-up 
of  private  speculations  and  feeling  under  the  guise  of 
"  higher  law,"  and  party  formulas  and  dogmas  above 
the  obligations  of  duty  and  the  mandates  of  the  supreme 
law  of  the  land. 

There  are,  I  know,  men  in  New  England  who  are 
opposed  to  the  existing  Union,  to  "  any  union  with  slave 
States."  They  control,  to  some  extent,  the  political 
machinery  of  the  States.  They  are  the  channels  through 
which  the  honors  and  patronage  of  the  National  Go- 
vernment are  chiefly  distributed.  They  are  men  of 


THE 


talent,  culture.  ubiquitr.  and  intense  activity  :  an  activity 
nd  ubiquity  that  supply  the  place  of  numbers.  Some 
of  oar  pulpits  and  presses  catch,  and  reflect  the  glow  of 
their  fionr  mL  These,  Mr.  Speaker,  are  not  Puritans, 
nor  the  children  of  the  Puritans.  They  have  wandered 
from,  the  fold  and  faith  of  their  fathers.  GoYernm 
to  them,  has  no  root  in  the  divine  will  or  counsels. 
Tfcev  know  not.  they  cannot  understand,  At  Kbcriy  of 
•fcrifcara*.  They  do  not  recognize  the  truth,  that  the 
powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God.  £ome  of  them 
have  substituted  a  diluted  Platonism.  or  German  panthe- 
ism. for  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  mutual  admira- 
tion for  the  worship  of  Almighty  God.  But  these  do 
not  represent  the  mind  or  heart  of  Xew  England,  its 
or  moral  forces.  This  condition  of  things  with 
more  the  fruit  of  the  activity  of  the  radical. 
than  of  die  supineness  and  neglect  of  duty  of  the  con- 
servative men  of  Sew  England.  They  have  been 
warned  of  the  coming  perils,  and  have  either  failed  to 
foresee  and  gauge  them,  or  have  shrunk  from  the  con- 
's necessary  to  avert  them.  We  cannot  now  escape 
without  much  tribulation  and  suffering  ;  nor  is  it  just 
that  we  should.  We  hold  our  institutions  at  a  price  we 
would  not  pay;  sleepless  vigilance.  We  were  not 
faithful  to  our  sacred  trusts:  we  permitted  visionary 
tfcearirtB,  «ectional  partisans,  fire-eaters,  and  radicals, 
North  and  South,  to  administer  a  government  founded 
in  concession,  conciliation  and  compromise  ;  and  which 
we  knew,  or  ought  to  have  known,  could  never  be  up- 
held and  maintained  in  any  other  spirit  than  that  in 
it  wa»  founded-  These  men  had  power  to  raise 


3TEW    Z5GLA3TD    AJTD    THE    U3B1ML  213 


the  storm:  they  hare  no  pilot  to  weather  k.    UK 
is  drifting,  no  firm  hand  at  the  hefast,  be 
and  despotist*.     Oh  for  the  •Kaster-spoit  to  say  to  the 
wares,  " Peace,  be  stffl !" 

Mr.  Speaker,  the  people  of  New  England  are,  for  the 
most  part,  a  law-loving,  a  law-abstfing  people.  They 
love  liberty;  but  they  know  k  earn  be  had  only  in  obedi- 
ence to  law.  obedience  of  those  who  make  and  those 
who  execute  the  laws.  They  have  die  largest  possible 
stake  in  the  present  Union  of  the  States. 


cannot  fail  to  see.  that,  under  any  reeonstnetion  of  the 

Government  they  have  nothing  to  gain,  every  thing  to 
lose.     They  w31  hear,  «•*•••_  give  heed  to  the  voice  of 

reason  and  duty.     They  cannot  be  smoved  by 

-  L  ~  r  -     ~_^~   cannot  oe  in ven       ~  —~~ 

those  of  their  fathers.  Its  priceless  blessings  are  th 
in  trust  for  their  children.  They  win  be  faithful  to 
trust.  The  attempt  from  other  States  to 

from  their 


If  those  hoiiimg 
New  England  shall  use  it,  or  try  to  use  it,  to 
from  the  Union,  or  to  consent  eren  to 
will  hear  in  every  city.  town,  and  Tillage,  on 
and  hill-top,  the  cry  which  was  rung  out  on  the 
Aprfl,  1775,  -To  arms!*"     The  i 
hare  sworn,  by  the  God  of  their 
accession  nor  abolition  shall  rob 
light. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  have  trespassed  too  long 


214  NEW   ENGLAND    AND   THE    UNION. 

indulgence  of  the  House,  without  having  touched  the 
grounds  of  attack  upon  the  social  and  personal  charac- 
ter of  the  Puritans  and  their  descendants.  It  is  scarcely 
necessary.  "  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.  Do 
men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles  ? "  I 
will,  however,  glance  at  one  or  two  points,  which,  my 
observation  here  has  convinced  me,  have  had  their  effect 
upon  those  who  have  not  been  with  us,  and  are  not 
familiar  with  our  history. 

Upon  no  point  is  attack  more  frequent,  or  error  more 
prevalent,  than  upon  the  social  position,  the  culture  and 
manner  s>  of  the  Puritans.  The  association  of  Puritan- 
ism with  rudeness,  .and  coarseness  of  taste  and  manners, 
has  really  no  higher  source  than  the  doggerel  of  Butler, 
and  the  sneers  of  Hume  and  other  apologists  for  the 
House  of  Stuart.  In  birth,  culture,  manners  and 
wealth,  the  Puritans  were  among  the  best  gentlemen  of 
England.  Need  I  recall  to  your  recollection  Hampden 
and  Waller,  the  Earl  of  Essex,  Manchester,  Fairfax, 
Harry  Vane,  and  John  Milton,  not  less  the  world's 
greatest  epic  poet  than  the  gentleman  trained  to  all 
the  graceful  arts  of  his  time  1  Need  I  remind  you  of  the 
fact,  that  the  aggregate  wealth  of  the  third  House  of 
Commons  of  Charles  I.,  a  Puritan  House,  was  estimated 
to  be  three  times  that  of  the  House  of  Lords  ?  Need 
I  refer  you  to  the  beautiful  picture  of  a  Puritan  house- 
hold in  the  Life  of  the  young  regicide,  Colonel  Hutch- 
inson,  by  his  accomplished  and  devoted  wife  I  I  may 
even  suggest,  that  the  sober  garb  of  the  Puritans  has 
descended  to  the  gentlemen  of  England,  and  the  lace 
and  embroidery  to  his  servant.  If  you  desire  further  to 


NEW  ENGLAND  AND  THE  UNION.         215 

examine  the  subject  (of  little  moment,  I  confess,  in  a 
country  so  democratic  as  ours),  I  invite  you  to  read  an 
admirable  paper  on  this  point  in  Sanford's  "  Studies  of 
the  Great  Rebellion ; "  or  the  ninth  chapter  of  the  first 
volume  of  Palfrey's  "  History  of  New  England ; "  a 
work  worthy  of  its  great  theme. 

Puritanism,  like  other  movements  political  or  reli- 
gious, suffered  from  counterfeits.  When  its  principles 
had  triumphed,  coarse,  vulgar,  greedy  men  assumed  its 
garb,  and  debased  and  dishonored  it ;  as  men  assume 
now  devotion  to  the  freedom  of  the  slave,  whose  real 
devotion  is  to  contracts  for  spavined  horses  and  rotten 
vessels.  Canters,  self-seekers,  wolves  in  sheep's  cloth- 
ing, men  with  long  prayers  and  longer  visages,  followed 
in  the  path  of  Puritan  victory  to  clutch  its  spoils.  The 
true  Puritan  was  sober,  godly,  self-denying ;  feeling  he 
had  a  divine  work  to  do,  and  doing  it  with  his  might 
To  say  that  he  did  not  attain  to  his  own  ideal  of  duty, 
is  to  say  that  he  was  very  like  sensible  and  good  men  of 
later  times  of  larger  light  and  larger  pretension. 

Another  alleged  obnoxious  trait  of  character  of  the 
Puritan  (and  his  descendant)  is  his  love  of  money,  and 
craft  in  getting  it.  I  meet  the  allegation  at  the  thresh- 
old; I  take  issue  on  the  fact;  I  utterly  deny  it.  I 
have  had  opportunity  to  know  something  of  the  people 
of  New  England  in  the  different  callings  and  paths  of 
life,  and  something  of  men  on  both  sides  of  the  water. 
I  have  studied  men,  with  some  diligence,  in  history. 
The  New-Englander  ("  Yankee,"  if  you  please)  loves  to 
get  money.  He  wants  success  in  every  thing  to  which 
he  puts  his  hand;  and  he  is  very  apt  to  succeed.  He 


216  NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION. 

has  thrift  and  providence.  He  lays  by  for  the  rainy  day 
and  shady  slope  of  life.  He  abhors  a  vacant  pocket, 
and  the  dependence  which  attends  it ;  but,  as  a  race,  no 
men  are  more  honest  in  getting  money,  or  more  liberal 
in  the  use  of  it,  than  the  men  of  New  England.  Libe- 
ral in  their  own  households,  and  in  every  work  of  kind- 
ness and  Christian  charity,  no  people  live  better,  or  give 
more  freely ;  or  understand  better,  that,  to  do  either,  a 
wise  economy  is  necessary.  Of  course  I  am  speaking  of 
the  general  rule,  which,  like  every  rule,  has  its  excep- 
tions. Every  soil  has  its  crop  of  hucksters  and  petty 
craftsmen.  Ours  are  peripatetic,  and  are  very  apt 
to  emigrate  South  or  West.  Some  find  their  way  to 
Government  agencies ;  and  a  few  half  way  back,  —  to 
Washington. 

The  New-Englander  is  said  also  to  be  an  intermed- 
dler.  How  far,  politically,  he  has  concerned  himself 
with  the  rights  and  interests  of  other  portions  of  the 
country,  I  have  had  occasion  briefly  to  suggest.  Upon 
the  matter  of  slavery,  I  cannot  deny  that  a  portion  of 
our  people  have  trespassed  beyond  the  just  bounds 
of  State  comity.  But  I  cannot  forget,  that  the  bearing 
of  the  slaveholders  toward  the  people  of  the  North  has 
naturally  provoked  hostility ;  and  that  from  the  sparks 
emitted  in  the  collisions  of  extreme  men,  on  either  side, 
the  fires  of  civil  strife  have  been  kindled.  As  an  indi- 
vidual, the  New-Englander  has  curiosity  largely  devel- 
oped. He  loves  to  know  what  is  going  on  in  the  world. 
He  is  inquisitive  ;  but  these  qualities  are  not  peculiar  to 
him.  They  were  found  in  the  first  man  and  woman, 
and  will  be  in  the  last.  "  But  out  of  the  rind  of  one 


NEW    ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNION.  217 

apple  tasted,"  said  John  Milton,  "  the  knowledge  of 
good  and  the  knowledge  of  evil  leaped  forth  into  the 
world,  as  twins  cleaving  together."  With  all  his  interest 
to  know  what  is  going  on  in  his  neighborhood,  he  wor- 
ships the  god  of  boundaries,  and  will  not  remove  the 
ancient  landmarks.  No  man  respects  more  constantly 
the  division-line  between  his  own  and  another's  rights. 

I  conclude,  Mr.  Speaker,  with  a  single  suggestion. 
It  is,  that,  under  our  system  of  Government  (many 
States  and  one  nation),  differences  of  culture,  manners, 
domestic  institutions,  of  climate  and  its  productions,  and 
of  forms  of  industry,  may  be  reconciled,  if  there  be  the 
spirit  of  conciliation.  Nay,  more :  experience  is  rapidly 
developing  the  truth,  that  in  that  diversity  has  been  our 
security. 

"  All  nature's  difference  makes  all  nature's  peace." 

Those  differences  all  removed,  the  probable  result  would 
be  the  absorption  of  the  powers  of  the  States  in  the 
central  Government,  toward  which  our  steps  are  tend- 
ing. The  States  gone,  or  stripped  of  their  most  impor- 
tant functions,  the  central  power,  call  it  republic  or  by 
any  other  name  you  please,  would  be,  in  substance,  a 
despotism. 


THE    END. 


28 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


JAN  21 1965 

i 
•omil2JJU2J 


RENEWAL  .  NOV  T 


1966 


Form  L9 — 15m-10,'48  (B1039 ) 444 


aft 


-.-.'• 

•  t  ••••  •    ' :  : 

«  I  -•  -    ^ 

'  '' 


